More handpicked essays just for you.
The political and social debates on second amendment and gun control
The political and social debates on second amendment and gun control
Gun debate : where is the middle ground
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
An Argument With Great Caliber
In the United States there are more guns than there are people (Washington Post 1). Due to this it is virtually impossible for the United States to actually get rid of all their guns, and or successfully get them out of the hands of the people they want them to. This creates a huge divide in America with people looking at the situation from all angles. “What should the United States do on this situation?” is a common question that is heard on the streets of America almost daily. One artist, named William Warren, created a political cartoon about this titled “Gun Control for Dummies”. In the image Warren uses the example of the people (criminals) that pro-gun law activists get guns away from. Through his illustration the artist conveys the message that creating stricter gun laws would create more problems than it would solve by using elements such as irony, emphasis, and capitalization.
Gun control has been a huge topic in today’s society, and there are many opinionated views on how it should be handled in the United States. This picture shows clearly the anti-gun control side of the argument due to how the illustration is drawn out as a whole. The cartoon shows two men, one labeled a “Law Abiding Citizen”, and the other labeled a “Criminal”. On the left side of the image, it shows both men with guns with the description “before” in front of it. To the right, is the same image except the law-abiding citizen is without his arms. Underneath all of it are the words “Gun Control For Dummies” depicting to whoever is viewing the image that it is from a pro guns point of view. The other noticeable thing is the change in facial expression from the criminal on the right side of the image showing him ...
... middle of paper ...
...int though, he is also trying to persuade his audience to be on his side of the argument. Warren uses the elements of irony, emphasis, and capitalization to his full advantages to do this. Looking at this image quickly one may not get its full message, but by looking at it from this perspective they will get the image, and might even change their thoughts on what position they stand with this topic. How can the American people meet at some crosspath though? Can there be some gun laws put in place that would restrict certain people to obtain a firearm? Maybe, if both sides of this argument could come up with a reasonable agreement than gun violence in America would possibly decline tremendously. The thing that all people need to remember is that it is not the guns pulling the trigger, it is the people, and something needs to be done about that at some point or another
In his article “Gun debate? What gun debate?” Mark O 'Mara discuses the controversial issue of gun control. O’Mara takes the tragic school shooting in Oregon as an opportunity to voice his opinion on the debate of guns. He clearly states his position and explains that gun violence has increased enormously because of the lack of command by the government and support from the public to speak out against it. O’Mara claims the issue is no longer a debate because it is so evident that guns have become a significant problem in this country and therefore actions must be taken to control and govern gun laws. In his article he attempts to raise awareness to the severity of the issue and tries to persuade his readers to take a stance against gun violence
Guns have possessed the spotlight of almost every news station. From the latest tragedy of a shooting killing innocent men, women and children to the arguments centering around if our gun laws possess strict enough qualities to keep our country safe. Charles C. W. Cooke, the author of “Gun-Control Dishonesty”, spreads his conservative view on the topic by ripping away any hope for a brighter day. Cooke’s main idea states that if nothing has happened to make gun law more strict even after the lives of innocent children were mercilessly ripped away from their young bodies than nothing should or could ever change. On the other hand, Adam Gopnik wrote his article, “Shooting”, uses a more liberal approach and inspires his audience to act upon the much needed change in our society
In America guns have been a part of the country’s society since it’s birth. Throughout history the citizens of the US have used firearms to protect the nation, protect their families, hunt for food and engage in sporting activities. The issue of Guns and gun control is complex. Weighing the rights and liberties of the individual against the welfare and safety of the public has always been a precarious balancing act. In the United States, gun control is one of these tumultuous issues that has both sides firmly entrenched in their positions. Those parties in favor of gun ownership and the freedom to use and keep arms, rely on the fact that the provision for such rights is enshrined in their constitution. In this climate of growing violence, rife with turmoil and crime, gun advocates feel more than ever that their position is justified. As citizens of the “Land of the Free” possessing a gun is a fundamental right, and may even be a necessity... Anti- gun lobbyists point to the same growing violence and gun related crimes in an effort to call on the government to take action. By enacting more laws and stricter control, these people not in favor of guns feel society would be better safer.
"Battleground America," written by Jill Lepore, provides a strong history of guns and the way they have changed in the eyes of the American through the years. She proves her point with strong evidence throughout her article, sprinkling it with opinion and argument that is strongly supported. She presents her argument to convince her audience that the open availability of guns allows citizens to undeservingly purchase them by displaying the credibility in her sources, using negative connotations in her speech, and the strength and objectivity only a strong logos appeal can provide.
As the generations of America’s youth continue to grow, so does the increase in violent crimes associated with each generation. Over the last decade, studies have shown that school shootings have increased by an astonishing 13%. Although this figure as a percentage does not seem like much, it makes one stop and think. Parents blame the video games and their violent behaviors for the influence on their children’s daily lives. Grandparents blame the child’s parents for not showing them the right way to grow up in the world. And then we have that child’s friends who say that this child just was not respected by their classmates, or perhaps even bullied into this violent nature. Regardless of the cause to this violent increase, many Americans do believe in a solution: gun control. Gun control is the situation in which the federal government would put a ban on owning firearms. Contrary to what many “hard-core” Americans believe, gun control would not necessarily ban them from owning hunting rifles or even personal handguns. It would simply limit the ownership of semi-automatic assault rifles, and other rifles of this nature. This does not contradict the Second Amendment of the Constitution which states that American citizens have the Right to Bear Arms. I believe in the constitutional Right to Bear Arms, and I am against any attempt to eradicate that right for any American citizen: however, I am for gun control in the sense of lowering the possession of semi-automatic and fully-automatic rifles.
In the essay, “Just Take Away Their Guns,” James Q. Wilson proposes a particular method to assist gun control laws in our country. Wilson proposes that if law enforcement acquires street frisks, the possession of illegal guns will drop in numbers. Through his many methods of persuasion, Wilson’s essay is executed effectively. He shows reasoning and fairness to the opposing sides to his argument but lacks the thought to other issues, such as the economy and social outrage brought on by his idea. Wilson shows the readers that he is passionate on this subject but is almost a little too hopeful with his childlike wonder of justice.
Scott Kjar, financial aspects teacher at Baldwin-Wallace College, is on the ace gun side of the debate of gun control. He begins by discussing the shooting frenzy at Virginia Tech by a man named Cho. His entire defense is economists have a tendency to contradict gun control on the grounds that guns bring more income to the United States. Kjar contends Cho had an arrangement to kill quite a few people on the grounds that he had arranged it out prior. Cho would have killed the individuals with or without guns. Kjar says guns are by all account not the only type of weapons. Contrasted with different works like meeting from Democracy Now, Kjar gives the master gun perspective, while Goddard gives the contradicting perspective saying there ought to be harder gun laws.
Aroung the time of John F. Kennedy’s assassination, the controversial and widely argued issue of gun control sparked and set fire across America. In the past decade however, it has become one of the hottest topics in the nation. Due to many recent shootings, including the well known Sandy Hook Elementary school, Columbine High School, Aurora movie theater, and Virginia Tech, together totaling 87 deaths, many people are beginning to push for nationwide gun control. An article published in the Chicago Tribune by Illinois State Senator Jacqueline Collins, entitled “Gun Control is Long Overdue” voiced the opinion that in order for America to remain the land of the free, we must take action in the form of stricter gun laws. On the contrary, Kathleen Parker, a member of the Washington Post Writers Group whose articles have appeared in the Weekly Standard, Time, Town & Country, Cosmopolitan, and Fortune Small Business, gives a different opinion on the subject. Her article in The Oregonian “Gun Control Conversation Keeps Repeating” urges Americans to look at the cultural factors that create ...
The Ethics of Gun Control The phrase "Gun Control" means different things to different people. One bumper sticker states that "Gun Control means hitting your target." However one defines gun control, the mere mention of it brings controversy.
“I don’t believe people should be able to own guns. (Obama)” This said prior to Obama’s presidency, in the 1990’s, is still a topic that is constantly questioned today. Many American’s feel the need to seek ownership of weapons as a source of protection; While others believe that private ownership of guns will do nothing more but heighten the rate of violence due to people taking matters into his or her own hands. Philosophy professor Jeff McMahan agrees with Obama’s statement in regard to the ownership of guns. In his New York Times editorial titled “When Gun ‘Control’ Is Not Enough,” McMahan provides evidence to support his theory of the dangers that quickly follow when allowing the community to own guns legally. McMahan, throughout the text, shows responsible reasoning and allows the reader the opportunity to obtain full understanding and justifies his beliefs properly.
On October 1st 2017, the United States experienced their deadliest mass shooting in history. Nevertheless, the debate about whether or not the United States should imply gun policies has been a popular topic in the 21st century. This country has made themselves best known for its military and gun policies. In “America Is a Gun” by Brian Bilston, the speaker demonstrates his thoughts that a gun would best represent America as an object. In this poem, the theme that the United State’s default is the lack of regulations of firearms is conveyed by repetition and contrast.
Many Americans are now applying for a license to carry licensed concealed arms with them. The rate at which licenses are being approved is worrying. This development is concerning law enforcement authorities. Putting so many firearms at the disposal of the public is counterproductive to the gains that are being made on improving security and especially in the cities where incidences of gun crime and violence are on the rise.
In this article the author Fawn Johnson gives us a brief look of what goes on during the great gun control debate. This article gives us a look at the gun control proposals, from American’s not bein...
People have questioned gun control long time. Many people wonder if anyone, aside from those who join the law force, should be allowed to carry guns. Benjamin Franklin once said, “Those who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety” (Wright 4). Franklin understood that taking guns away from law-abiding citizens would not uphold their liberty. Some people who argue for gun control state many violent crimes involve guns. Others believe a child could find the gun and something bad could happen to the child or others when a gun is unsafely stored. People who argue against gun control might say there is a huge psychological gap between citizens who shoot to protect themselves or their property and those who go into schools and shoot at others. Criminals will always find a way around gun control laws and will be able to obtain and use guns illegally. The second amendment protects gun rights for individual citizens. Reasonable gun control laws and educational steps can be taken to protect the majority of U.S. citizens. Gun control does not only take guns away from criminals, gun control also limits law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves and their families when necessary.
The Crux,. 'If You Believe In "Gun Control," This Is Probably Not For You... '. N.p., 2014. Web. 30 Oct.