Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Gun control in the united states of america essay
Gun control analyses of public policy
Gun control in the united states of america essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Gun control in the united states of america essay
“It said that gun violence costs the U.S. $229 billion a year.”(“Issue Overview: Guns in America” Paragraph 8, line 6,) The articles are both comparable to each other and differ from each other. These two articles show facts about gun control in similar but also, in contrasting ways. In conclusion, there is numerous ways these articles are related to each other and their stances on gun control. The two articles are similar in multiple ways. One way, the articles relate is that both state that the NRA is convincing and paying government officials to lessen restrictions on guns. The article “Issue Overview: Guns in America” states the NRA has convinced lawmakers to weaken laws on guns. Another, way these two articles are comparable is that they both refer to countries with stronger gun laws after a shooting has happened to compare them to U.S.A; “Famous Speeches: ‘We call BS,’ Emma Gonzalez's speech to gun advocates” states “Australia had one mass shooting in 1999, but after the massacre, it introduced gun safety and hasn't …show more content…
One way, the articles are contrasting is the article “Issue Overview: Guns in America” states in paragraph 1, line 6, “Firearms are involved in the deaths of more than 30,000 people in the U.S. each year. About two-thirds of these deaths are from suicide.”. This contrast from the other passage because this shows that suicide is a big portion of deaths from firearms not just mass shootings. A second way, the articles are diverse is “Issue Overview: Guns in America” states “ a gunman killed 49 people in a bar in Orlando, Florida. The man pledged allegiance to the extremist group Islamic State.”. This makes the two articles diverse because “Famous Speeches: ‘We call BS,’ Emma Gonzalez's speech to gun advocates” only talks about shootings by independent people and not shootings by terrorist organizations. In conclusion, the two articles have contrasting opinions over this
"The Controversy of Gun Control." Open Discussion about Various Controversies. N.p.. Web. 3 Dec 2013. .
First I am going to discuss he similarity between the two articles. These two articles have very few similarities. These two articles focus on ways to help society to prevent another incident like the Sandy Hook shooting. They came up with policies that can try to prevent another shooting to this degree to happen in a school again. They both focus on the safety of the society.
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 ...
Opposing sides have for years fought over the laws that govern firearms. For the purposes of this paper "Gun Control" is defined as policies enacted by the government that limit the legal rights of gun owners to own, carry, or use firearms, with the intent of reducing gun crimes such as murder, armed robbery, aggravated rape, and the like. So defined, gun control understandably brings favorable responses from some, and angry objections from others. The gun control debate is generally publicized because of the efforts of the Pro-Gun Lobby or the Anti-Gun Lobby.
Public policies are developed in response to the existence of a perceived problem or an opportunity. The analysis delves into a public issue or problem and assesses a set of proposed government action for addressing the issue. The job of the analyst is to describe the background and status of an issue and then, using research and analysis, determine a proper government action to resolve the issue. By comparing options and weighing their expected benefits, the analyst should conclude with a recommended course of action or inaction to addressing the issue.
“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 right of all Americans to bear arms is a right the Founding Fathers held to equal importance as the Constitution itself. Gun control laws directly violate this right and therefore should not even be under consideration. Even if that issue is overlooked, gun control advocates state that in order to reduce firearm related violence, gun control laws must be implemented to remove the violence caused by firearms. Although this may seem reasonable, the consequences of such laws are ironically counterproductive; they exacerbate the problem instead of fixing it. Besides the fact that the American Constitution guarantees its citizens the right to bear arms, the idea of restricting gun ownership in order to reduce firearm-related violence would ultimately fail given the previous experiments of gun control in England and in numerous states.
There are gun control laws to try and reduce the number of violent shootings that occur. They are trying to put limits on weapons that Americans can own. The government is trying to take our guns away mainly because of people that are criminally insane. Most of the people who commit crimes don’t even have the weapons legally. If the government takes away the rights of people who are allowed to have firearms in their possession, it will most definitely cause an outrage. Most people believe that the people should be more capable of maintain proper use of the firearms instead of having them all taken away. Taking the firearms from Americans away would cause a lot more problems than there actually are. The people will be upset with the government taking firearms away because of the horrible people who harm innocent people using them. So they will do anything to their capabilities to keep them.
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.
On December 14, 2012 Adam Lanza, a 20 year old with asperger’s syndrome, shot his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut . According to the final report by the states attorney’s office he got in the school at 9:30 AM in the morning and shot the principal and the school’s psychologist that went out to the hallway to check loud bangs they heard. He then moved on to class rooms where innocent children were learning and started shooting and by 9:40 AM, just ten minutes later, he took the lives of twenty six people, including twenty children age twelve and below and six adults, before taking his own life (State Report on Sandy Hook Elementary shooting).
The essential differences between the two types of gun violence in the articles and film is the fact that the article discusses gun violence in mass shooting and at active shooter reports when the film discusses the after math that takes place after the gun violence. The film focuses on the offenders who committed crimes and how they want to come together and help their committees. Focusing on how offenders ended up in prison and how they feel about the crimes they committed. Although the articles give more details about where the crime took place and for how many minutes. With holding so many facts about crime scenes and victims, providing information about active shooters and their whereabouts. I believe the same solution can be used to address both types of gun violence, because they both make people stop and wonder what if. No one wants to be sitting behind bars for the rest of your life and reading about shooters who statistically commit suicide after their own crimes that I believe would prevent further gun violence. I also believe if more people were made aware of the statistics that would resolve some of issues that many cities are facing everyday with violence gun crimes. The most important solution is ending gun violence and figuring out ways to make communities more aware of the amount of gun related crimes happen in their own backyard. Ultimately ending in everyone coming together and realizing that gun violence needs to end in order to protect our loves
The United States today can be a scary place. Someone that is disgruntled, has a mental health issue, radicalized through terrorist propaganda or for any other reason can take up a firearm and mass murder innocent people. It can happen anywhere, anytime, anyplace. Anyone that pays attention to any news or newspapers has probably heard something about gun control. It’s a hot topic in this country and around the world. There are a lot of problems with gun control and regulating guns in the United States. Before you can talk about solutions you need to isolate the problems keeping the solutions from being realized. The people who are for and against guns do have common solutions but there is strong opposition
Guns, Crime, and Freedom states that, no gun law which restricts the right of law-abiding citizens to own guns has been proven to reduce crime or homicides, not even the Brady Law and the “Clinton Crime Bill.” These two laws st...
Crime and guns. The two seem to go hand in hand with one another. But are the two really associated? Do guns necessarily lead to crime? And if so do laws placing restrictions on firearm ownership and use stop the crime or protect the citizens? These are the questions many citizens and lawmakers are asking themselves when setting about to create gun control laws. The debate over gun control, however, is nothing new. In 1924, Presidential Candidate, Robert La Follete said, “our choice is not merely to support or oppose gun control but to decide who can own which guns under what conditions.” Clearly this debate still goes on today and is the very reason for the formation of gun control laws.
Collinson Stephen, Editorial, “Barack Obama’s emotional evolution on gun control”, CNN News, 7 January, 2016; He’s claim is that many of the shooting happened across the United States. Collinson’s supports his thesis by showing examples of the shooting that happened throughout the U.S. His purpose is to show how guns are causing so much harm to our country. The intended audience for this article is anyone who wants to be informed about gun control.
Maddox describes, with an abundance of logos, why a consensus on gun control will not be reached by explaining the political climate surrounding the debate. Additionally, her window into American partisanism enlightens foreigners about the conflicting views on how to properly handle gun violence. Maddox’s article begins with “Not everyone concludes that tighter gun controls might prevent more gun deaths, although this has been the common conclusion on this side of the Atlantic,” seems to suggest that America is the only one who has not gotten gun control right, it’s so subtle you can consider it a stretch, until you take the closing paragraph into account. Her assertion that “It