More handpicked essays just for you.
Debate over the right to bear arms
Sandy hook school shooting aftermath
Should America have the right to bear arms
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Debate over the right to bear arms
The popular coffee company known as Starbucks chooses to allow their customers to enter and order from their restaurants with open carried firearms. This has caused an uproar of protest from gun control enthusiasts and counter protesters supporting the open carry of firearms. The gun control enthusiasts state that the open carry of these firearms threaten the safety of not just the customers of Starbucks but also it’s employees. They also argue that supporters of open carried firearms are insensitive to the sentiments of the families affected by the Sandy Hook shooting. However, counter protestors state otherwise. They state that they are simply exercising their right as Americans to bear arms. They also argue that it is the choice of the
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
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.
Gun control is an important issue in the United States. The big issue with gun control is some people want stricter gun laws. On the other side of the argument people that supports the usage of a firearm thinks that it is an individual’s right under the Second Amendment and guns are needed for self-defense.
U.S congress woman Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head. This happened in Arizona, a state where guns are allowed in open carry meaning everyone has option to carry a gun as long as it is not concealed. When this congress woman was shot, the shooter became enraged. After shooting 3 more people his gun got jammed, this is when a civilian jumped him and stopped his irrational behavior. This brings up many different opinions on whether guns should be allowed or taken away. John Luik author of the article “The Increased Availability of Guns Reduces Crime” and Sabina Thaler the author of the article “The Claim of Increased Gun Availability Reduces Crime is Unfounded” are two examples of people having different opinions on such a debatable topic. Both authors talk about guns taking people’s lives, Thalers article focuses on guns taking innocent people’s lives, and Luiks article focuses on guns being innocent people’s protection.
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 ...
Gun-control laws are a very controversial topic right now in the U.S., especially when it comes to allowing concealed-carry holders on college campuses. Nevertheless, guns should be permitted for concealed carry on college campuses if the carriers have concealed-carry licenses because mass shootings occur mostly in gun-free zones. There have been many incidents in which concealed-carry holders have disarmed attackers, and concealed-carry holders are overwhelmingly law-abiding citizens. However, the argument’s opponents believe guns should not be allowed on college campuses for various reasons, including: professors might be afraid to issue bad grades, a gun may go off by accident, college
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.
Central in the arguments against gun control is its ability to restrict any citizen of the United States the right to own guns which is protected under the constitution. Specifically, due recognition is made to its connection to the 2nd Amendment wherein it seeks to protect the individual liberties of people. This facet also applies to gun ownership regardless of the original objective and intention. “The second amendment from the Bill of Rights grants private citizens the right to bear arms. Thus, people who stand firmly against gun control insist that no legislation, technically, should have the right to take away a citizen’s guns without first repealing the amendment in question” (Groberman 1). A good approach to consider in highlighting this part comes from depriving the citizen of his basic right on the basis of specific presumption that it would be used for violence or crim...
Is scary to think about family members or close friends dying innocently because they were victims of a gun shooting. The recent shooting at a 7-Eleven store, across from Cerritos College, has many people talking about gun violence. In America, on of the biggest issue is gun violence. Throughout the years, the gun violence in America has been increasing. Most of the time, the shootings occur at schools, stores and at public places where lots of innocent people get injured or dies. When a shooting happens, the news reporter, social media or at the front page of a newspaper talks about the problems with guns. There are two sides in this gun debate, one is making more laws and the other is more guns. Individuals must consider which side of the debate offers the greatest gain for the least cost. Looking back to laws, making more laws will not work because individuals will break the rules. Many will not stop until they own a gun, legally or illegally. Even though, some individuals do not favor the right to own a gun, owning a gun will determine the live or death of an individual by making sure the individual is safe. Having the right to own guns might help save more people’s lives because a gun will be a really good source of protection. In terms of the gun debate in America, individuals should prioritize personal liberty because having more guns people might feel more safe and protected.
The right to bear arms has been an important conversation in America for decades. As of recent tragedies such as the Sandy Hook shooting and the Aurora Colorado Theater shooting, the debate is more heated than ever. From large-scale massacres to single fatality shootings, gun violence is unwarranted and heartbreaking. However, the Second Amendment protects individual citizens’ right to own firearms: “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,” it states (Bill of Rights). Although this part of the Bill of Rights has not been changed in United States’ history, some citizens argue that, because the Constitution is a working document, this should be adapted to fit current needs and protect communities. Citizens who wish tip the scale in favor of the community’s protection argue that guns are dangerous, easy to access, popular weapons that allow disgruntled or mentally unstable citizens to “inflict mass causalities” and were originally only intended for use in a militia (Joe Messerli). On the other hand, those who wish to benefit civilians argue that taking away guns restrains individual liberty and that gun control would prove futile because criminals would find ways such as the black market to obtain guns, weapons can serve as self-defense prevent crimes, and reasonable restrictions would be more effective than an outright ban (Joe Messerli). Both arguments have valid, well developed ideas, and both sides tend to be passionate in debate.
Americans should be able to have, own and carry handguns if they feel the need to protect them. It’s a statement that is a topic of major debate and has been for years. There are proponents and oppositionists with regards to handgun laws and rights. Both sides have strong, seemingly valid arguments. In the end, we should have that choice.
Recent mass shootings at San Bernardino and Sandy Hook Elementary have resurfaced the issue of gun control, with citizens appealing to the federal government to change laws concerning firearms. While there are organizations that are for tighter gun laws, groups like the National Rifle Association argue any laws restricting possession and use of firearms ignores the Second Amendment, and therefore reduces a law-abiding citizen’s constitutional right to own a firearm (Stingl, 2015). However, the United States still has a higher crime rate compared to other developed countries that have tighter gun laws, suggesting more restrictive laws could reduce gun violence (Grey House Publishing, 2011). With increasing gun violence and deaths, laws pertaining
Starbucks is currently the industry leader in specialty coffee. They purchased more high quality coffee beans than anyone else in the world and keep in good standings with the producers to ensure they get the best beans. Getting the best beans is only the first part, Starbucks also has a “closed loop system” that protects the beans from oxygen immediately after roasting to the time of packaging. They did this through their invention of a one-way valve which let the natural gasses escape but keeping oxygen out. This gave them the unique ability to ensure freshness and extended the shelf life to 26 weeks. Starbucks isn’t only about the coffee, it’s also about a place where people can escape to enjoy music, reflect, read, or just chat. It is a total coffee experience. The retail outlet has been responsible for much of Starbucks growth and has contributed substantially to their brand equity.
McDonald's is planning to capitalize on the public's willingness to pay $4 for a cup of coffee by hiring baristas and dropping espresso machines in 14,000 of their fast-food outlets. Meanwhile, Starbucks, with business lagging, is fighting back with an "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" strategy, by offering heated breakfast sandwiches and adding drive-thru windows to some of their locations.
The threats facing Starbucks include trademark infringements and increased competition from local cafes and specialization of other coffeehouse chains, and the saturation of the markets in developed economies, and supply disruptions. Furthermore, the increasing prices of its inputs such as dairy products and coffee beans pose a threat