Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
School shootings changing school policy
School shooting response paper
Gun control measures
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Moral dilemma: Before paper
Gun control My moral dilemma topic is gun control, though this is a topic that hits close to home for me since I am a gun owner. With this said I am more prone to be more against the government controlling the law-abiding citizen’s ability to own or purchase firearms, though I understand the need to regulate the buying and selling of guns. However that isn’t the real question here, the real question is whether or not gun control is a moral dilemma. In recent years there are many examples of why gun control should be stricter, however these are also examples of how restricted the law-abiding citizens have actually become. While the laws governing guns have gotten stricter those who don’t abide by those laws are not inhabited by those restrictions. I am not trying to persuade others to my point of view however the first thing to proper gun control is proper education. In recent years there have been school shootings and officer related shootings. The school shootings all could have been avoided if certain signs in the behaviors of those involved weren’t overlooked. However all these are just examples of why gun control should be stricter and more regulated. They are also examples of why there needs to be better education effects made to
…show more content…
The points that I have made are nothing more than my opinion and should be taken as such. Though these points are not actually backed by hard facts or evidence they can be validated by simply watching the news or reading a newspaper. Every law enforcement officer will not deny there aren’t enough training classes for civilians who want to own a firearm or who already own a firearm. So with that being said the morality of gun control falls to the individual to decide as the situation dictates for the simple fact that the majority of the time a situation can be resolved IF both parties involved can talk things
I am writing on behalf of my thoughts and myself about gun control laws. My position on this topic is neutral leaning towards the "No Gun" law. The idea of a federal law to ban these guns is a good idea, but it could be better. I believe strongly that guns should be banned from our country in some kind of way, but there are exceptions like for law enforcement and hunters. This law could lower the murder and death rates drastically. The US would be a whole different and safer country to live in. No one should live in a society where they are afraid of being killed by a gun, we should try harder to make this society in the US a better place. I have many reasons to back my views on this topic, and here are some main reasons that you should really think about.
Joseph Sobran argues that, “there are solid constitutional arguments against gun control. For one thing, nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government granted the right to limit an individual's right to own firearms”. He states that the government has no right to limit guns. Even though he has a point there is a limit to that statement such as serious criminals and mentally unstable people. Likewise Sharon Harris states that guns protect people against criminals, “the right to bear arms protects the individual from violent aggressors and from the ineffective protection state and federal government is offering its citizens … criminals benefit from gun control laws that make it more difficult for ordinary citizens to protect themselves.” She believes that guns keep people safe and that regulating guns will only benefit criminals. This is not true because regulations help prevent criminals from getting guns. Having less regulations is a dangerous
One of the biggest debates in education is how to respond to gun violence in schools. According to BBC, “There were 64 school shootings in 2015” (BBC). One response to the rise in gun violence in schools is to arm teachers. Even our President has mentioned “giving a bonus” (Davis 2) to teachers that The fact that the idea of arming teachers is even being discussed is disappointing. Bringing more guns into a school is not the answer to gun violence. Most people that defend the idea that guns will “help” keep schools safe have basically three points: (1) teachers will be trained in gun safety, (2) it helps deter potential school shooters, and (3) it will make the students feel more safe. Even though there is some truth to those points, I think that the cons of arming teachers vastly outweigh the pros of arming teachers.
...e can finally put some of the missing puzzle pieces together. Such as the motives Adam Lanza had for the shootings, and why he targeted children. Also with a little knowledge about how school shootings/violence is increasing every day. We can see how most of these shootings are always relating about the same motives, bulling. Understanding the characteristics of the shooters and the causes of most school violence/shootings can help us look for signs and hopefully stop the tragedy before it happens. As a future teacher, I know what kind of signs to look for in my students or people in general to help them before an event like the Sandy Hook happens again. Hopefully the government will come to a complete choice about gun laws and we can start to see some kind of different on their end. However, this issue needs to be focused more on for us to start seeing a decrease.
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.
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.
The debate over firearms has been polarized for too long. Gun law is a never-ending issue because there hardly is any true debate. Americans (and even gun owners) do support the governments efforts to make sure guns are less dangerous in violent hands, but that is the main problem-the guns getting in the wrong human hands. Millions of law-abiding Americans do own and do enjoy their guns. But criminals and sometimes-disconcerted kids often use firearms to kill. The use of firearms has increased tremendously. An average day in Los Angeles is four people dying in a gun related crime and the United States faces approximately 87 deaths a day. There are more than 200 million guns in circulation in the United States and if you don’t own a firearm, chances are that your neighbor or friend does (Fineman 27). Sure, the Founding Fathers incorporated the Second Amendment as “the right to keep and bear arms,” but it did not give the distinction of using guns to kill more children and people than anywhere in the world.
America is the most well armed nation in the world, with American citizens owning about 270 million of the world’s 875 million firearms (Marshall). Indeed, this is more than a quarter of the world’s registered firearms. The reason why Americans own so many guns is because of the Second Amendment, which states, “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.” (Rauch) This amendment guarantees U.S. citizens the right to have firearms. Since this amendment is relatively vague, it is up for interpretation, and is often used by gun advocates to argue for lenient gun laws. Hence, gun control is a frequently discussed controversial topic in American politics.
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.
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.
Taking into account of the recent shooting sprees, the gun control debate has started again. However, people have contemplated: “Why does America need gun laws” and “Why are so many states disagreeing about the restrictions that need to be put in place for civilians looking to purchase firearms.” The reasoning for such contemplation is that the fluxuating strictness of gun laws have led to several incidences within states that have strict gun laws due to the fact that the perpetrators of these incidences have purchased their firearms either from black markets, or states where the severity of gun control is at minimal levels.
The debate over the right to bear arms according to the Second Amendment has been a hotly contested issue for many years in American history. The matter has been one of the most controversial issues in the second half of the twentieth century and into the twenty-first; disputed between politicians on the liberal and conservative side along with issues such as abortion, capital punishment, and gay marriage. The Supreme Court has officially defined the controversial Second Amendment by stating that states have the right to maintain a militia separate from a federally controlled army (Gale Encyclopedia, pg. 155-162). However, “Courts have consistently held that the state and federal governments may lawfully regulate the sale, transfer, receipt, possession, and use of certain categories of firearms, as well as mandate who may and may not own a gun (Gale Encyclopedia, pg. 155-162).” Therefore, the issue is one that is extremely hard to clarify. Which side is right?
President Barack Obama says we have an “obligation” to try anything that could save one child, but many people find this statement to be ridiculous. Gun control is thought of as a government policy or regulations to control or limit the sale and use of firearms. In the U.S. constitution, the 2nd Amendment states that 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. Inside America today, gun control is a major issue, especially in the political arena. People debate on the daily that not all things in society make it a safer place to live. The best intentions of America’s lawmakers often do not achieve the desired outcome; therefore, the nation is somewhat split on the idea of gun control. Some advocate there is too much government, while others feel there is not enough. Gun control may or may not help society as intended; just as giving up your constitutional rights no more ensures a safer environment nor does the gun advocate who follows laws promoting progressive gun safety.
In 1982, a survey of male inmates from eleven different penitentiaries, stated that sixty-nine percent of the prisoners knew another criminal that had been scared off, wounded, or decided not to commit a crime because they thought the victim had a gun (Agresti and Smith). As The United States heads to the end of 2013, current gun control debates are striking the nation, leaving everyone to develop their own positions on which side of the debate they want to be on. Gun control is defined as efforts to regulate or control sales of guns; however, most of what we hear from other people is that Obama wants to take away every gun in the nation. That’s not entirely true. Obama’s proposal to Congress is a law that would increase background check protocols, ban assault weapons, high-capacity ammunition, and armor-piercing bullets. The proposal also provides more funding for additional police officers on the streets, first response training, mental health programs, and school emergency plans.
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...