Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Gun control and society
Gun control and crime prevention
Gun control and crime prevention
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Gun control and society
Anti-gun politicians are not wrong after all, as we all know guns are used to impair and injure potential victims and naturally people should not have access to these dangerous items. With logical reasoning, clearly any substance or thing that can hurt someone should be taken away or severely limited to only the highest extent. Private Citizens do not need a gun for self-protection because the police are there to guard them, although the Supreme Court tends to rule differently. When confronted by aggressive and violent criminals, you should "put up no defense, give them what they want, or run quickly" (Chairman Pete Shields, 125). Vulnerability of a person during the course of crime causes the safety factor in the situation to increase significantly. Guns are a good place to start, but honestly why stop there? I will further discuss objects that rhyme with gun that should be monitored and controlled as well.
Now let me be serious, fun control. I enjoy having fun as much as anyone else out there, but let’s all be realistic, It is truly getting out of hand. Have you seen traumatic videos of people having fun and were scared to death? It is starting to become ridiculous. Videos of crazy kids golfing, skiing, snowboarding, riding bikes, and all other dangerous activities need to be put to an end quickly. Obviously the enjoyment of fun needs to be reduced. Time is being wasted on these endeavors and ultimately people acquire injuries, this is a severe price to pay for a good occasion. Adults along with children are liable to break bones and end in a trip to the hospital which is quite frequently the case. Subsequently enough is enough. Congress without a doubt needs to step in and regulate how people spend their recreational leisure ...
... middle of paper ...
...un shines and people around the world rejoice, but suddenly our skin turns red, starts to itch and forty years later we all have Melanoma. I don’t know if Congress can do it alone but possibly with the Presidents power something can be done. With an agreement from the forty eight contiguous states can achieve an agreement that can be worked out where the sun shines a reasonable amount every day. People can’t control their exposure to the sun; we need political involvement to help out.
Pun Control, this may be the most challenging obstacle discussed yet. We all know a pun consists of word play that suggests two or more meanings, but over use of puns in dramatic or serious works is not punny. The brilliant author William Shakespeare, along with other comedy writers used this strategic method and by reading their novels the overflowing joy and laughter is outstanding.
Thoughtful laughter is a technique used frequently in satirical pieces in literature. It allows for the audience to enjoy the wittiness of a work, later ponder on the meaning, and then apply the message to reality. Thoughtful laughter is often an inner experience that can only be achieved by authors who write meticulously. Two examples of satirical works in literature that display this concept explicitly are Voltaire’s Candide and C.S. Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters. Both authors explore the depths of satire and simultaneously deliver an important message to readers through skillful technique.
Then those who oppose gun control argue guns are a necessity: hunting in the wild, self-defense, and it is part of the American culture. Furthermore, gun violence is having a vast impact on loved ones; losing a family member can have enormous affects socially, physically and mentally.
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 best examples of this is when Capulet asks Lady Capulet for a sword and she replies "A crutch, a crutch. Why call you for a sword?" In this line the mockery of Capulet is obvious and appealing to the audience as it is direct. & nbsp; Shakespeare is known to be fond of puns and uses them quite often. regularly, but he doesn't use them as often as the Elizabethan audience. expected him to do so.
The second amendment grants all Americans the right to bear arms. The ability to hold a firearm at any time as long as the firearm is registered. In the United states, all it takes to hold a firearm is a background check and a safety class. In a short reading from the “American Now” book a short article By Christina Tenuta called Responsible gun ownership saves lives she asks “do Americans really need guns?”, but are the guns really the problem? Although the second amendment requires some decent documents , the qualifications to obtain a firearm needs to be revised to a mental check, a family history check , and also to make it a priority for reinforcement to check on the registered firearm every six to twelve months.
Should the 2nd amendment be revoked or changed? Many Americans would say “No,” stating that guns are dangerous and times have changed. Others might argue that having the right to bear arms keeps people safe and less threated by the outside world. In this debate, both sides of the 2nd amendments constitutional rights will be argued. The upcoming presidential election has been influencing voters to revoke our 2nd amendment rights which could change the democracy on which our country was founded.
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. Those who argue for gun control usually state guns are a part of most violent crimes. However, this is not always true. While it is true that limiting gun ownership with laws could prevent individuals from possessing guns, it does not prevent people from illegally having or using guns. Those who carry guns legally are not the problem.
William Shakespeare, poet and playwright, utilized humor and irony as he developed specific language for his plays, thereby influencing literature forever. “Shakespeare became popular in the eighteenth century” (Epstein 8). He was the best all around. “Shakespeare was a classic” (8). William Shakespeare is a very known and popular man that has many works, techniques and ways. Shakespeare is the writer of many famous works of literature. His comedies include humor while his plays and poems include irony. Shakespeare sets himself apart by using his own language and word choice. Shakespeare uses certain types of allusions that people always remember, as in the phrase from Romeo and Juliet, “star-crossed lovers”.
Ultimately, it is a person’s choice to use firearms to commit violent crimes. So criminals should be controlled, not the guns which they share with millions of law-abiding citizens. Gun control supporters claim that gun control lowers crime rate. We as people need to take a stand and fight for our Second Amendment and the right to bear arms. Gun control advocates need to realize that passing laws that honest gun owners will not obey is a self-defeating strategy. Gun owners are not about to surrender their liberties or their right to bear arms. The Federal Govement of the United States should not be able to take away the right of law-abiding citizens to own a gun.
There is one reaction that is always to be expected after a mass shooting, and that is the call for an increase in control. This can be defined in numerous different ways, and can include a great deal of different aspects. People who call for an increase gun control in the wake of mass shootings are, in general, people who believe that more guns means more crimes. Gun control advocates cite studies that state, “Higher gun prevalence is associated with an increase in homicides, and suicides, and possibly even more residential burglaries” (Ludwig 17). Often times, after mass shootings, those in favor of more gun control look to countries like Australia, Canada, Great Britain and Japan, and their strict gun policy and cite this as the direction
The problem with guns is fairly obvious: they decrease the difficulty of killing or injuring a person. In Jeffrey A. Roth's Firearms and Violence (NIJ Research in Brief, February 1994), he points out the obvious dangers. About 60 percent of all murder victims in the United States in 1989 (about 12,000 people) were killed with firearms. Firearm attacks injured another 70,000 victims, some of whom were left permanently disabled. In 1985, the cost of shootings was an estimated $14 billion nationwide for medical care, long-term disability, and premature death. In robberies and assaults, victims are far more likely to die when the perpetrator is armed with a gun than when he or she has another weapon or is unarmed.
Gun rights are the source of much controversy in today’s society. People have been skeptic after the multiple shootings that happened in the past few years. Recently, the NRA has been under constant threat by Congress. Background checks are not effective as planned. In order to keep the gun rights, changes need to be made in order to prevent gun control from being created.
Guns are always represented as a sigh of terror, violence and insecurity due to which, gun control is always being a significant and controversial issue from both political and self defense point of view. Guns and humans had a shared part of the past history, during that period guns were used for hunting and protection from the invaders. The second amendment of the U. S. constitution even made the guns/arms more debatable on the basis of keeping guns as their right. Their is a no harm keeping a gun for self protection under a proper law and order, which will be regulated by different background, physical check and the awareness of proper use of the guns. These checks will help lower down the statistical data of misuse of firearms and reduce
Along with many other reasons, guns do not need any more restrictions. No one seems to be taking into account all of the other means of deaths and the death tolls of those actions. Many of the murders in the United States are committed with a variety of resources such as hammers and clubs, drugs, and even vehicles. According the FBI crime files, in 2006 the amount of deaths executed with clubs and hammers were 618, meanwhile the amount of murders rifles were used in was only 438 (Hawkins, “FBI: More People killed…”). This clearly portrays that rifles are not as much of a problem as it may seem. It shows that something so simplistic and common can cause more deaths than a sophisticated rifle. No matter what the weapon may be, simple or complex,
Something to also consider is although we have many gun laws, not all are enforced. For instance, the Brady Bill gets easily nullified. This bill enforces a waiting period and a background check to buy a firearm. One example of the bill being nullified is, some states nearly nullify the federal law by removing individuals from the NCIS list, which is a list that prohibits certain people from buying weapons if they have completed their sentence. Another way the law is nullified, is buying a firearm through an unregulated forum. Through an unregulated forum a person, like Adam Lanza, is able to avoid background checks, waiting periods, and other reasons. (Record, and Gostin 568)