“Enough of Just Shock, Prayers and Tears After Mass Shooting,” by Leonard Pitts, was published in the Miami Herald on Oct. 3, 2017. Pitts’ editorial focuses on the response in America and around the world to the mass shooting that killed 59 people and injured over 325 people just two days prior at a country music festival in Las Vegas. Pitts begins his essay by remarking on how routine mass shootings and our response to them have become. He describes how all politicians announce their shock and sadness, and then those on the left call for gun control and those on the right argue that now is not the time for a debate on gun control. All over the world, lights are dimmed at major landmarks, and people on social media declare “we are with” whatever new city has been attacked, and people everywhere offer “thoughts and prayers.” Pitts then …show more content…
Pitts believes that many of our elected officials are bought off by the NRA. He says, “We may elect them [our politicians]. but we don’t buy them. The NRA does that.” Here he wants readers to feel contempt for politicians who allow themselves to be bought off by a special interest group, implying that these politicians are corrupt. Pitts also tries to evoke anger and shame in readers who “let them get away with this,” asking “Why do they pay no price at the ballot box?” He targets not only the politicians but NRA members themselves who “so willingly swallow the lie that the Second Amendment cannot co-exist with reasonable regulation.” The phrase “swallow the lie” is harsh; it implies that people who believe that the Second Amendment rules out all gun regulation are gullible, even stupid. This appeal will be more successful with readers on the left, who are less likely to be members of the NRA. NRA members, however, may object to being portrayed as weak and
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
On the night of October 1, 2017, a gunman rained fire down on a crowd of concert goers at the Route 91 Harvest music festival on the Las Vegas Strip in Nevada, leaving 58 people dead and 546 injured. There are three key points of interest and discussion about this tragic event that have stuck out to the American and global publics as well as to journalists, politicians and social critics around the world. These are, who was the assailant and why did he do what he did, how did this incident affect people in America and affect America as a whole and
Over the past years media has been overwhelmed with news about mass shootings happening around America and if mental illness is the primary cause of the violent act. On February 2014, Jonathan M. Metzl and Kenneth T. MacLeish published their article “Mental Illness, Mass Shootings, and the Politics of American Firearms” in the American Journal of Public Health that addresses the issue that mental illness has very little to do mass shootings which is commonly used on the aftermath of the shooting
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 ...
A man by the name of Sean Faircloth, who is an author, an attorney, and a five-term state legislator from Maine; went against Sam Harris to give his own beliefs on the ordeal. Faircloth also wrote an article for The Week in response to Harris titled, “Why more guns won’t make us safer” in which he claims that Harris neglected the two largest problems involving gun-violence. Faircloth believes that Harris failed to acknowledge the substantial issue of gun-related domestic violence against women, and the success of gun-control legislation in foreign countries. Utilizing statistics, real world examples, and his own logic; Faircloth goes in depth with his core arguments. He wrote his article to dissuade the readers of Sam Harris’s article that “Why I own guns” lacks
As violence and murder rates escalate in America so does the issue of gun control. The consequence of this tragedy births volatile political discourse about gun control and the Second Amendment. The crux of the question is what the founding fathers meant when they wrote, “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Since the writing of the Second Amendment the make and model of firearms has changed dramatically and so has the philosophies of the people. A rifle is no longer defined as a single shot, muzzle-loading musket used to primarily protect families or solely for food. Should the weapons we use today be protected by an amendment written nearly 222 years ago? Should the second amendment be rewritten? Does the Second Amendment apply to individual citizens? These questions spark extensive debates in Washington D.C. regarding what the founding fathers intended the amendment to be. The answer to this question lies in the fact that despite hundreds of gun control articles having been written , still the gun control issue remains unresolved. History tells us gun control debates will be in a stalemate until our judicial system defines or rewrites the Second Amend. This paper will examine the history of the Second Amendment, and attempt to define the framers intent, gun control legislation and look at factors that affect Americans on this specific issue...
Wilson, H. (2007). Guns, gun control, and elections. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Professional champions of civil rights and civil liberties have been unwilling to defend the underlying principle of the right to arms. Even the conservative defense has been timid and often inept, tied less, one suspects, to abiding principle and more to the dynamics of contemporary Republican politics. Thus a right older than the Republic, one that the drafters of two constitutional amendments the Second and the Fourteenth intended to protect, and a right whose critical importance has been painfully revealed by twentieth-century history, is left undefended by the lawyers, writers, and scholars we routinely expect to defend other constitutional rights. Instead, the Second Amendment’s intellectual as well as political defense has been left in the unlikely hands of the National Rifle Association (NRA). And although the NRA deserves considerably better than the demonized reputation it has acquired, it should not be the sole or even principal voice in defense of a major constitutional provision.
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.
The National Rifle Association (NRA), recognized today as a major political force and as America's foremost defender of the Second Amendment, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a Free State the Right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The NRA adheres to the belief that the Second Amendment guarantees the right of individuals to bear arms. Recent U.S. Supreme Court cases have confirmed those beliefs. In spite of whether one personally adheres to these interpretations of the amendment or not, the fact is there are over two hundred million guns in this country. Moreover, there are over seventy-five million firearm owners. In addition to the NRA’s political activity for second amendment rights, it has fulfilled a service, as since its inception, it had been the premier firearms education organization in the world by providing firearms safety and training.
Mass shootings have become a common occurrence in the United States society and have brought our society's safety debate to the attention of American politics. Both sides of the debate agree that we need more safety precautions but neither side can officially agree on what is to be done. What can we do about the raging number of mass shootings? There is no definite solution for mass shootings but there are precautions the United States can take to try to overcome the overwhelming number of mass shootings occurring. Gun Control is a major topic in the debate of how we can keep our society safer but how is what remains a mystery but we can start with altering the second amendment, and having stronger gun laws and background checks.
For years proposals for gun control and the ownership of firearms have been among the most controversial issues in modern American politics. The public debate over guns in the United States is often seen as having two side. Some people passionately assert that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own guns while others assert that the Second Amendment does no more than protect the right of states to maintain militias. There are many people who insist that the Constitution is a "living document" and that circumstances have changed in regard to an individual’s right to bear arms that the Second Amendment upholds. The Constitution is not a document of total clarity and the Second Amendment is perhaps one of the worst drafted of all its amendments and has left many Americans divided over the true intent.
Eighty-nine people die from gun violence in the United States every day according to the Brady Campaign , from school children to victims of domestic violence to people going about their daily lives. As we mourn the lives of those killed in incidents of gun violence across the country, we need to take action. We should all do everything in our power to keep tragedies like this from happening again. When it comes to addressing mass shootings, we need new answers
With the media shining so much light upon this topic, it is evident that mass murders in the United States of America are more frequent and deadly. In fact, studies have found that the USA has more mass public shootings than any other country (Christensen). These numbers have only been increasing in the past decades. This is shocking because the USA holds only 5 percent of the world’s population, but as a nation, contributes to 31 percent of mass murders (Christensen). Although these murders continue to be a rare phenomenon, weak gun laws, the need for fame, and issues with societal views are the main causes of the increase in cases.
I agree that technology could affect your eyesight and if all you are doing is playing games then it could affect your mind. If you are doing some educational stuff on technology then it could actually help your mind because you could learn something. No matter what it will affect your eyesight somewhat especially if you are too close to the technology device. If you are just using technology to play games and watch TV then it might start to affect you. It may not affect you a lot but it may affect you some. Using technology to do educational stuff like reading a book online or even watching an educational video will help you and teach you new things.