Taya Kyle is the widow of the ‘American sniper’, Chris Kyle. Recently Mrs. Kyla has headlines for her vocal against President Barack Obama's proposal on heavy gun regulations. CNN, MSNBC and Fox News all did at least one piece on this particular issue and now has made national news. The event included questions from those on both sides of the gun control debate with many, like Mrs. Kyle, who had lost people close to them to gun-related crimes. The reason why these news outlets focused on Mrs. Kyle is because her beloved husband who served as a U.S.Navy SEAL from 1999 to 2009 he is currently known as the most successful sniper in American military history. The American hero who unfortunately was killed on on February 2, 2013 in Texas at a shooting In this open debate Mrs. Kyle directly spoke to president, they had a back and forth discussion specifically about background checks when purchasing a gun. Mrs. Kyle tells the President that background checks do not stop people from killing, and that new government regulation only offers a false sense of hope for the American people. Mrs. Kyle is not wrong in her argument that gun control laws do not deter crime, however gun ownership deters crime. John R. Lott, Jr., PhD, is the author of More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws. Dr. Lott in Nov. 26, 2013 conducted a study that found, between 1980 and 2009, "assault weapons bans did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level" and "states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murders."(Lott). The President’s rebuttal to Mrs. Kyle’s statement is that increased gun ownership did not necessarily cause a decrease in gun related crime. “If you look at the places where the areas of the highest gun ownership the crime rate has not significantly dropped compared to areas where crime has significantly gone down due to the new gun ownership policy”(Obama). In MSNBC’s video they just showed this in the form of a video. No background, data or follow-up is added to the news piece. They did not offer a particular slant or side over this issue. Overall this is just a clip of what actually happened, whereas CNN and Fox News have much more information and depth to their news pieces. For this reason MSNBC had the least effective news outlet in conveying this
For a long time she wanted to deny any existence of 'evils ' (a term she made for killers). When her husband died as an American sniper, she felt the need to own a gun. Her views on guns are mixed, but she is a firm believer in the second amendment (Kyle ¶1-3). "A mere 27 words in the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights somehow manage to incite some of the most heated and occasionally violent debates over two centuries after its drafting ("Right" ¶1). Gun owners cherish their freedom to guns. It is a sense of protection that the government has allowed us to have. Gun control, in no way, takes away that freedom; it simply limits certain rights for everyone 's safety ("Urbanism"
Sandy Hook is an elementary school in Connecticut that was invaded by a shooter, Adam Lanza. Twenty-eight people were shot and killed, twenty of them being children between the ages of five and ten. Before Lanza arrived, he shot and killed his mother who was a teacher at this school. The article was published the day of the shooting to the Washington Post. The article was written announce what had actually happened during this tragic event. The article was directed towards parents with kids and adults to inform everyone on the catastrophe and to hopefully make schools as safe as they could possibly be. Additionally the author also states that this is not the right time to try and discuss the gun control laws.
Last month a horrific incident occurred taking the lives of, news reporter Alison Parker, and camera man Adam Ward. Journalist for the New York Times, Nick Kristof, wrote an article titled “Lessons from the Virginia Shooting” in which he states his opinion on gun control. Kristof, is a human and woman’s rights activist, but also a father and husband which would explain his concern on this topic. He believes we need better firearm restrictions in order to reduce death due to gun violence. This has been a controversial issue for a while, but I believe it had more attention brought to it when the live shooting occurred in Virginia on August 26th. I personally think Kristof wrote this article because he has children and a wife, so it’s normal for
McMahan, the author of the New York Times editorial, includes why the United States should rid private ownership of guns completely or as much as possible. He explains tactful points as to why guns cause more bad then good when privately owned. “When most citizens are armed, as they were in the Wild West, crime doesn’t cease. (McMahan)” Allowing anyone to receive gun ownership is the same as putting a helpless baby in a lion’s den. Prior to the editorial an accident occurred in Newtown, Connecticut at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Twenty year old Adam Lanza, killed his mother and then grabbed three privately owned guns from his house. He later went to Sandy Hook elementary school where he shot and killed twenty kids age’s six to seven as well as six adults. Once approached by officers Adam Lanza took a shotgun and killed himself. "It's horrible. It's really ho...
think that people in society do not feel they can trust or rely on the
In the second amendments to the U.S. Constitution, it is stated that the right of people to keep and bear arms should never be infringed under any circumstances to ensure the security of a free state. However, it seems that this amendment has been misinterpreted by many Americans since the country has seen many innocent souls falling due to high gun crimes. And that is why I decided to write a research paper to answer one question: a question that states, “To what extents, does strict gun control policies by the governments reduce gun crime rates?” And this writer strongly argues that stricter gun control policies by the governments will reduce gun crime rates significantly. I personally believe my research is very important because it will provide the evidences that leaders around the globe who are struggling to combat the rising gun crime rates needs to take aggressive roles so that no more people has to live in fear of being killed by people with weaponries like handguns.
In the article “Gun Control Can Prevent School Shootings,” Bennett shares the effects of gun violence in the past, present, and future. The Sandy Hook shooting occurred on December 14, 2012 when twenty children and six adult staff members were killed. Barely a month after the shooting, eleven of the families affected by the shooting went to meet privately with Joe Biden, and members from the Congress and cabinet. Bennett stated, “They were preparing to wade into some of the roughest waters in American politics: the gun debate.” President Obama gave a speech in Connecticut vowing to fight for change. And as Bennett put it, “Members of Congress started acting as parents instead of politicians.” Bennett explained to the families that they couldn't get rid of assault weapons or high capacity ammunition magazines, no matter how bad the shooting was. The families got angry and stated they did not want to know what they couldn't do, but what they could do to honor their children.
“It’s not gun control we need, it’s sin control” (Si Robertson). The government can’t control what people do with their firearms or who has them in their possession. Gun control does not decrease crime. With or without guns people will still find ways to harm others and even with a gun ban people will still find away to either make or buy a gun illegally. With a gun control law in place there is no good way for citizens to protect themselves. Even though some may say it that it will stop some of the crime, there are many reasons that prove that gun control doesn't decrease crime.
Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. To many people gun control is a crime issue, to others it is a rights issue. The US should not adopt stricter gun control laws because, it 's the best source of protection, laws will not control criminals, and it takes away your Second Amendment rights. The majority of U.S. gun owners does not represent a threat to society ( Gun Control Reform par. 1). The other part is either mentally ill or a criminal.
Gun control has been around for many years and it has become a topic that has been talked about more and more often. However, gun control has created some differences on whether it is being used effectively and whether it is a good law or not. Gun control is the second amendment of the constitution and basically what it means is that it is the right to bear arms. The right to bear arms is a concerning topic for many people because now when a mass shooting occurs people immediately blame gun control but how do we know that gun control is the problem? People may think gun control is a good thing but in reality crime and violence are caused by many other things therefore gun control does not reduce violence.
Increasing gun control will not decrease crime. However, if we change the way we punish crime we may be able to change the way people look at crime and stop them from committing them. When thinking about crime the first thing that comes to mind is gun control. The problem is not the laws we have about guns, it is that they laws are not being followed. Criminals do not follow the laws and do not go about getting weapons legally. Adding more gun control laws to an already confusing situation, only prevents the law abiding citizens their rights to protect themselves.
The right to bear arms is guaranteed in the constitution by the Second Amendment. Liberals are looking to amend the constitution any way they can. They want to ban handguns or at least restrict sales. Studies have shown that gun control cannot stop people from committing the crime.
The Second Amendment of the United States protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms. It was adopted on December 15, 1791 along with the rest of the Bill of Rights. The United States Government should not infringe on those rights by the enforcement of gun control against law-abiding citizens. Gun control does not reduce crime, does not stop criminals from obtaining guns, and does not address the real issue of violent crime. There is no evidence that gun control affects the crime rate. The United States government is attempting to reduce violent crime by controlling the amount of guns on the market, who is allowed to purchase a gun, and what type of gun a person is allowed to purchase. The only people affected by gun control laws are the law-abiding citizen that should be allowed to purchase firearms without the government’s interjection.
Crime rates, especially violent crimes such as murder, rape, and robbery, peaked around 1991 and 1992, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reports. The major crime topics of that time included drug abuse and the war on drugs, still some remnants from the crack cocaine epidemic from the late 1980s, and the increase in juvenile violence in the late 1980s. In addition to these, legislation such as the Brady Bill continued to surface as a public policy that drew attention to the issue of gun violence, and other topics tended to be emphasized by the Bush administration, such as the exclusionary rule, the death penalty, habeas corpus, and the insanity defense. Community policing developed at the grassroots level in the early 1980s, coming out of local police demonstration projects that were often funded by the National Institute of Justice and the Bureau of Justice Assistance. Community policing came about out of the rejection of traditional policing practices in the 1970s, largely as a result of various studies that found that long held assumptions in policing were found not to hold up to scrutiny. An article written by James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling published in an edition of Atlantic Monthly in 1982 brought about the broken windows theory. This theory holds that when people no longer care about their community, the condition on that neighborhood often sends signals to people that no one cares. This allows for disorder and minor crimes to pass unnoticed, which will lead to more serious crimes. Once disorder begins to take hold and minor crimes become common, eventually the neighborhood will decay and become crime ridden. The key to fixing the broken windows is for police to target these minor crimes...
I will compare the changes in the homicide rate and arrest rates among groups of people born before and after the legalization of abortion. With this it should expose a factor in the 1900s which lead to the decrease of crime due to the legalization of abortion. Even though it appears that the legalized abortion was the factor for crime rate to drop it was only one of many factors presented in the evidence. Though I believe it is an important factor worthy of elaboration are careful analytic dissection. Most sources point to an unmeasured period of crack and cocaine use yet the trend still appears to be that abortion affected crimes due to the legalized abortion affecting families of lower class and minorities hence the reduction of them and the reduction of crime.