Gun Control Gun control is an issue that has plagued the United States Government, Industries, Corporations, the people around the world, and especially the media for various years. It is an issue that can not be solved easily without either infringing on the rights of individuals, or leaving an easier way for terrorists and criminals to harm civilization in the United States. It is also an issue that can be viewed in many ways, and can be acted upon either slowly, or at the drop of a gabble. These things entice the media and draw them in like bait, which in turn can have major and dramatic effects on the points of view of the media’s audience, and it can also portray biased views toward issues such as thou, and cause its audience to obtain …show more content…
CNN is a television news network that seems to be the most biased one I have seen yet. Almost everything you seen on the headlines on the the gun control section of their website is bashing the NRA (National Riffle Association) in any way possible. They may seem like they are just putting new out there, but they way the diction is worded, makes the entire article, or broadcast seem very sarcastic which allows you to see the bias. Although they may have somewhat of a good reason to do so, as a news channel, you would expect to see all kinds of news and not specifically selected topics that paint certain views into the mind of the uneducated viewer. In this case, CNN is basically saying that we need gun control for sure, and that the NRA is a terrible organization because they oppose giving up our rights to the government. The PBS news channel, seems to be doing what a news channel should do, which is to put out news as is, and unbiased. PBS has a variety of different broadcasts and articles about gun control some that question President Obama’s actions toward the subject and some that support them. There is also coverage on what member of the NRA think compered to those who follow
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
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
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 ...
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.
It is interestingly sad how debates on gun violence and gun control is being handled in our society by our top leaders and lobbyist. Gun control has become a serious issue and a national epidemic, however, the debate is far from over. In the article “under the gun” by writers Rottenberg, Rice and Franich, for entertainment weekly, the writers discussed the failing of gun control laws and the increase in gun violence. By setting sides of their argument, the writers discussed violence in movies, TVs and videogames and how this violence impact our society, thus allowing their audience to decide for themselves.
Each person has a different view on the world. If a person is asked about their view on a certain subject, they will likely show support or disdain for the subject. For example, some people believe abortion is morally wrong. Others view abortion as the mother’s choice since she is carrying the child. On the issue of gun control, people are usually either for or against stricter gun laws. Why do people view the world in the way they do? How do people decide what stance to take on an issue? To answer these questions, sociologists look at the sociological perspective which “stresses the social contexts in which people live” and “examines how these contexts influence people’s lives” (Henslin, 2013, p. 4). Furthermore, the sociological perspective
“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.
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.
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
The U.S. Congress is still debating the effectiveness of federal regulation of guns and ammunition. All sorts of federal laws have been made since 1934 to promote the regulation of firearms. Many people have different views on the topic of gun control. I, for one, am pro “gun-rights” and believe that there are many disadvantages to the controlling of guns.
There is an American consensus for some form of gun control. “…[F]irearms were involved in two-thirds of all murders in the United States and [t]he United States leads the world's richest nations in gun deaths…murders, suicides, and accidental deaths due to guns - according to a study published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the International Journal of Epidemiology” (Lepore). There might be some far extreme people who think that all guns should be banned but most sane Americans do not think that gun rights should be abolished. Americans regard self-defense as the most compelling reason to have a gun and twenty-two percent of households have handguns in the United States. However many people do think that gun control laws must be enacted and enforced. Pro-gun extremists and the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) must understand that there is a real for many people at the uncontrolled s...
Rather, it involves politics. Gun control is an issue that divides public opinion. Anytime there is an issue that divides public opinion, politicians and their respective parties will take sides. Some politicians choose the side that takes pride in weapon ownership and are part of the “American gun culture” (Spitzer 8). Political science professor Robert Spitzer describes the American gun culture, “This phrase usefully summarizes the long-term sentimental attachment of many Americans to the gun, founded on the presence and proliferation of guns since the earliest days of the country” (8). Many politicians use the idea of American gun culture to appeal to the general public. They rely on feelings of patriotism and support. Other Politicians say that civilians owning firearms threatens the safety of civilians. Politicians use this to their advantage because they can appeal to different demographics by choosing sides in the debate. It is these politicians that are a leading cause of the debate over gun control. If politicians didn’t take notice or mention anything about gun laws and gun control, the public wouldn’t care about it as much when they go to vote for president, senators, etc. These politicians are a catalyst in the debate because they want to gain support for themselves in as many demographics as possible. By using the topic of gun control they can sway people to vote for
The debate over gun control in America has constantly been brought up over the years due to gunmen killing large amounts of people in shootings. From Columbine to Sandy Hook, or the shootings of the two reporters in West Virginia, these public shootings are occurring everywhere. Lawmakers and civilians alike are pushing for increased gun control in hopes of preventing the same tragedies. Anyone that has been affected by the shootings has been pushing Congress and state governments to force new sanctions on the government. Over the past three years, Congress has shot down all the laws despite the large amounts of public support.