The author makes several main claims throughout his articles such as, “national news stories are virtually never done on permit holders stopping mass public shootings,” and “the proposals put forward by gun control advocates wouldn’t have stopped this attack.” The columnist firmly believes in the power of the second amendment and as such, he wants to limit the amount of new laws that control how much the people can hold and use weapons. The claims listed are claims of fact and policy respectively. He gives several examples of how these different prevented mass shootings were not widely advertised and how the ones that were not stopped were all over news stations to convince people that guns are not helping the common people. The author then proposes that the changes that gun control advocates propose will not make a difference and begins to give reasons why which makes this a claim of policy. He says that making a change will not make any change so the laws should be left the same as they are now, or they should be more inclusive to allow more people to carry a concealed weapon.
One of the main fallacies that the author uses in his articles is a hasty generalization. He uses the example of the Texas shooter and his bad background that would have prevented a weapons liscence to make the generalization that, “ their proposals wouldn’t have stopped any of the other mass public shootings in the last couple decades.” The author does not back this claim up very well and
Gun control is an extremely controversial issue in the United States, and the debates around this topic has started many decades ago. According to the article “Gun Rights vs. Gun control” by Brianna Gurciullo, these debates are fueled by the people who defend the gun rights and the people who advocate in favor of gun control. It has been difficult to prove that gun ownership is directly related to an increase in violence due to the fact that researches tend to disagree on the impact of gun ownership in the American society. These debates tend to be brought to the spotlight whenever there is a mass shooting in the United States, which according to Abbey Oldham, who is a reporter from the PBS News Hour, happens quite frequently. However, organizations, such as the National Rifle Association (NRA), defend that the laws for gun control violate the Second Amendment of the constitution, which states “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” stated Gurciullo. Due to the distinct interpretations of the constitution and the difficulty to agree on the best approach to tackle the issue, this controversy seem to be almost unsolvable.
Mass shootings are increasing in the United States, and gun control advocates are seizing the opportunity to push anti-gun legislation to deter gun violence in America. Guns and the Second Amendment have come to the forefront of political rhetoric, leading to conflicting views between lawmakers on the future of gun legislation. Republican lawmakers are encouraging law abiding citizens to acquire firearms and to defend themselves against acts of violence by criminals. On the contrary, Democratic lawmakers believe the only way to slow gun violence in the United States is to remove guns from society. While certain politicians believe strict gun laws would protect the American people, the proposed policies would make our nation more vulnerable
Countless opinions have been broadcasted on national news media regarding what society ought to do about gun control. This controversial topic sparks many heated debates with people of either position reluctant to compromise. Gun supporters claim that the proposed gun laws infringe on their constitutional right to bear arms. Conversely, others believe that restricted gun access would cause gun violence to decrease. Regardless of what side one stands on, with the increase in gun violence, it is safe to say that something must be done.
Another article looks at the Tucson shooting where six individuals were killed as an example (Kaveny, 2016). While the author agrees that the constitution protects the rights of gun owners, she makes the argument that semiautomatic weapons were not what the founding fathers had in mind though and that these type of weapons should not be allowed to be owned by the public (Kaveny, 2016). The author also believes that it would be beneficial to have to obtain a license to own firearms and to purchase insurance for possible damages along with further funding for mental health patients to help keep these mass shootings from happening again (Kaveny, 2016).
Gun Control has been a controversy for as long as people can remember. This Controversy has increased recently due to the mass shootings taken place all over the United States. Gun control has its pros and cons, Some believe “Gun control laws state that the Second Amendment was intended for militias; that gun violence would be reduced; that gun restrictions have always existed; and that a majority of Americans, including gun owners, support new gun restrictions.”While others say that the Second Amendment “protects an individual’s right to own guns; that guns are needed for self-defense from threats ranging from local criminals to foreign invaders; and that gun ownership deters crime rather than causes more crime.” To be able to pick a side one must look at the argument from both perspectives, that 's what this paper accomplishes. You must go into detail about this issue and conduct research to form your own opinion.
Over the last years gun control has become a very widely debated topic. The city, county and state lawmakers seem to be having different stands about the public having easy access to guns. Adam Small states, “After centuries of relative obscurity, the Second Amendment has become the center of an intense academic and legal battle during the last twenty years” (1213). The supporters of gun control and its opponents both claim to have the best interest of this country’s citizens .However, there are private citizens who believe that there should be laws to limit the number of people who own a gun. Even though the United States has enacted laws for regulating firearms, the recent shootings at Aurora movie theatre and Sandy
With an increase in the number of mass shootings that have occurred in the United States in the last few years the issue of gun control laws has become a prevalent topic of debate throughout American society. This debate stems from two opposing arguments over gun control. Some feel gun control laws are fair and not the contributing factor to these mass shootings, whereas, others feel that there is an urgent need for strict laws in order to end the problem of mass shootings. There are numerous pros and cons to the enforcement of stricter gun control laws but we must note a few things: stricter gun control laws would interfere with the second amendment, it is not the gun that kills it is the individual, and it is ultimately not laws that are
Gun issue is not only a big problem from United States, it’s also a big problem around the world. With more and more people buying guns, gun violence increases everywhere. “ Guns are more lethal than more other method, people try” he adds “ Americans own an estimated 300 million guns” (nytimes.com). As gun ownership increases, the arguments about gun control can be easily found online in America. “Over the past 25 years, Americans’ support for stricter gun control laws has been generally declining even as the number of mass shootings is on the rise. While some high-profile shootings have resulted in calls for increased restrictions, that support has proved fleeting thus far. Gun control is one of the most sharply divisive issues in the U.S. today”(Perez-Pena). America does not have strong gun control law, which cause many criminals to possess guns and commit crimes. “ The vast majority of guns used in 15 recent mass shootings including at least two of the guns used in the San Bernardino attack, were bought legally and with a federal background
The article “Will recent shooting influence gun legislation” takes about how the recent shootings are having an influence on people's perspective on gun control. It explains the various mass shootings across America such as the one at Charleston. Some people are deciding to go out and buy more guns, while others are trying to enforce more gun control laws. The American people are split down the middle, deciding whether they should protect gun rights or attack then. The article tackles varying concepts, such as mental health with guns and the use of assault rifles. It shows how gun violence has escalated in the past few years, and how the American people are reacting to it. Overall, it is about
In these last few years, the U.S. has been struggling with a massive amount of gun violence. From 2000 to 2013, there have been 160 cases of mass shootings in the United States, totaling 486 deaths and 557 wounded. And yet, despite these statistics, we still cannot pass even the most moderate bills, which would help reduce gun ownership in this country. This is because advocates of the Second Amendment, such as the NRA, stand between our nation and improved gun control legislation. Some of the NRA’s flimsy arguments for keeping the strict Second Amendment include controlling the number of guns owned cannot possibly reduce the number of shootings and people are the cause of mass shootings and not firearms.
Throughout the past several decades gun control has been put under scrutiny by the media and the general public. While the first major piece of gun control legislation was passed in 1911 in New York, it was not until the 1960’s that the gun control movement was truly galvanized(“Gun Control Reform”).This occurred because of a series of major political assassinations that led to the Gun Control Act being signed into law in 1968(“Gun Control Reform”). To this day the gun control movement lives on and many Americans believe that harsher gun control laws should be put into effect. These supposed gun laws range anywhere from a nationwide ban of assault weapons to a complete ban of guns. Supporters of gun control argue that taking away guns from
n this article, Cooke examines many of the most horrific mass shootings of recent years with the purpose of hypothesizing whether stricter gun control laws would have prevented any or all of those tragedies. His conclusion is that they would not have. He then extends this contention to state that gun control laws in general are useless, because they clearly do not prevent acts of mass violence.
Mass shootings have become a disturbing movement that only seems to be rising. The Orlando tragedy caused opened the conversation towards guns and public safety. Americans no longer feel safe. The theoretical statement in Why Obama Can’t do anything about guns by Jamelle Bouie is gun control isn’t the President Barack Obama’s failure; it is the American people not speaking up. The theory used as a premise in this argument is not accepted because the understanding of gun policy is still a myth (Bouie, 2016). Additionally, the alternative theory is if gun policies were to remain stagnant, the danger would escalate over time. The doubtful prediction derived from this theoretical statement would be republicans supporting the liberal views about gun control. Americans and the U.S. government must stand together to fight for the protection of the society.
“The second amendment of The United States Bill of Rights is my concealed weapons permit, period.”- Ted Nugent. Saving lives one by one starts with limiting the purchase, sale, and use of guns in America. According to Alexander Lee, the political and social debate over the question of how much gun control is appropriate and it has been regularly discussed within the last decade. Shootings such as Sandy Hook, and Tucson shootings have raised the government’s awareness on guns and possible restrictions and regulations. Gun talks are discussed with the question, “Will controlling guns cut back on violent crime rates?” Although many guns are open to be sold to the public over 18, there are traditional gun laws that limit who can own them. These laws include sell restrictions to the mentally disabled, the age in which you can obtain a gun, background checks, and dishonorably discharged military personnel. Gun control laws could have a positive effect in America by reducing homicide rates, but at the same time, citizens still have the right to bear arms under the second amendment under the U.S constitution. Gun control laws do not mean the absolute confiscation of guns, but rather reduce the amount of power a gun and the amount of ammo that a gun can hold.
For many years, people have been pushing the American government to implement new laws that deal with gun control. Supporters of the argument claim that increased gun control will drastically reduce the crime rate in America. Nevertheless, a majority of gun control arguments are formed from strict control of data and emotional appeal. The mainstream media picks up these stories and broadcasts them to viewers without providing any context to them. While gun control activists assert that gun control is necessary, the American government should not ban guns because of the following reasons: potential vulnerability of innocent people being shot at by criminals and the inability for people to defend themselves against their own government.