Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Gun control increases crime rates
Cause and effects of gun control
Gun violence and it's effects
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Gun control increases crime rates
Gun Control
One of the biggest and most controversial topics of all time would have to be gun violence, gun control, and whether firearms should be banned. One question still remains, who or what started all of this? Many can conclude that firearms are to blame for when these catastrophes occur, but many don’t pay their attention to the man or woman pulling the trigger. Clearly, firearms do not cause violence, rather the people pulling the trigger do. USA Today, Oxplore, and The Washington Post all give great examples of this.
Five months ago a man by the name Stephen Paddock shot up a Jason Aldean concert in Las Vegas. He killed 58 citizens and injured over 500. Some blame the gun, but is that really the one to blame? USA Today states, “The fact that he had the type of weaponry and amount of weaponry in that room, it was preplanned extensively, and I’m pretty sure he evaluated everything that he did and his actions, which is troublesome.” This shows that the gun didn’t come up with the plan. The man pulling the trigger was the one who planned all of this. What would getting rid of the guns do? Really anything can be turned into a weapon.
…show more content…
The person and the amount of hate does a lot of the damage. Hate is a very strong term often used in the wrong way.
Even though it’s a very harmful word, it oftentimes plays a big role in mass shootings. Oxplore.com states, “Hate played a part in Omar Mateen’s killing spree, when he shot 53 people in a gay nightclub in Florida in 2016. His father told police that just before the attack Omar had seen two men kissing in the street and got really angry. Interestingly, his hatred of homosexuality might also have been partly self-hatred - it’s since been discovered that he’d actually visited the gay nightclub several times before.” This shows that hate is a very overpowering emotion that makes us do crazy things. The gun didn’t hate anyone, it was Omar. If Omar didn’t have any hate inside of him, the shooting would have never happened. There have also been cases of sad and home broken
kids. Nikolas Cruz was the man accused of the Florida high school shooting. He’s only 19 years old and is probably going to rot in jail for the rest of his life. The Washington Post states, “When he got older, he became isolated, angry and withdrawn, losing his parents and eventually moving into friends’ houses.” This shows that people that grow up lonely and sad are probably not going to be the best individuals in the world. He wanted others to feel his pain. It wasn’t the guns idea, it was the sad, home broken kids idea to follow through with the thought. If someone is feeling down or is lonely or sad and they feel that violence is the best way to handle it, taking away the guns probably isn’t going to stop them. Even if guns are banned, people can turn anything into a weapon. There are still bombs, knifes, and countless other weapons. Clearly, firearms do not cause violence, rather the people pulling the trigger do. Whether firearms get more restriction or not, it’s not going to stop the violence. People will continue to find new things as weapons, and eventually everything will be illegal. So, where does the blame lie, the gun or the person?
"The Controversy of Gun Control." Open Discussion about Various Controversies. N.p.. Web. 3 Dec 2013. .
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
Carter, Gregg. Guns in American Society: An Encyclopedia of History, Politics, Culture, and the Law. Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, 2012. Print.
In a world full of hatred and hostility, gun control may seem like an easy fix to the ongoing issue of mass shootings and murders in the United States, but in reality placing restrictions on guns will not eliminate the problem entirely. Nicholas Kristof argues about this issue in his article, “A New Way to Tackle Gun Deaths,” posted in 2015 in the New York Times. Kristof claims that instead of banning guns entirely we should learn how to coexist with them. He argues that for change to occur throughout the world, it would be nearly impossible to rid the world of guns and that evil will always remain, but serious government threats could potentially eliminate this problem. Kristof builds his credibility by including statistics, incorporating
Tragedy after tragedy, people find themselves mourning over the lives lost. And over and over again, they look back to see how they could have prevented it. People continue to argue and constantly debate what actions should be taken, and while doing so, more and more people lose their lives at the hands of gun violence. It’s clear to see that not much has been done to keep these weapons out of the wrongs hands: the shootings at Columbine High School and Virginia Tech have shown that. What would happen if there were to be another devastating shooting to occur? How would people react? Or would they just argue some more, while the wrong people can still easily get a hold of guns? The only way they can ever gain control of anything is by controlling the source of the problem, where people are able to freely purchase guns without restrictions. In order to reduce gun-related crime, unlicensed gun sellers should be required to run background checks on their customers.
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.
In this article the author Fawn Johnson gives us a brief look of what goes on during the great gun control debate. This article gives us a look at the gun control proposals, from American’s not bein...
Imagine... you are driving down the street to see your loving family. You stop at a gas station and a guy comes in. He has a bandana and bad intentions. All of a sudden, he loads a pistol and aims it towards you. What are your options? Try to visualize, a guy going to see his wife and kids, but when out of nowhere a person pulls you aside and then points a pistol at you. Over the course of years, ninety-three United States citizens are killed with guns. Due to these reasons, it seems it is necessary to get rid of guns because of the 21,175 suicides, 505 deaths due to accidental/ negligent discharge of a firearm. Guns should be banned for civilian use, due to too many deaths from unregistered users, misuse, and increased crime rate.
Some of the reasons for gun control are that it will help the government get a control on us.Hitler in world war 2 used gun control against the jewish people to better control and corral them. Historians have documented most everything about it except what made it so easy to attack the defenseless Jews without fear of resistance. Their guns were registered and thus easily confiscated.(stephen halbrook)If the government started registering guns and know their location left and right they could overthrow us with a flick of their wrist. Imagine your local police coming to your doorstep in your house and taking your only good form of self defense.Then turning right around and kidnapping your children and kids and including yourself.I mean thats what the jews were facing during the holocaust.This is why so people do not support gun control for fear of government taking over us and loss of their guns.also some people use guns to provide food for their family thru the form of hunting.you take away their guns you take away their ability to provide for their family.I believe the government doesn't have a right to take our guns to get a hold on us.But its actually better when the government lets us carry weapons around in our everyday lives.
The conversation of gun control and gun regulation has been a great debate over the decades. NRA Executive vice president Wayne LaPierre, in his speech on Newtown Shooting that occurred on December 21st, 2012, addresses the topic of gun control and argues that guns are not the cause of gun violence. LaPierre's project is to instead of gun control and decreasing the numbers of guns, increase the numbers of guns to solve the problem of gun violence. On the other side of debate, an American journalist, Nicholas Kristof, in his journal, "Do We Have the Courage to Stop This?" argues that guns are the cause of gun violence, but they should not be banned. Kristof's project is to regulate guns with many cautions. While these two authors have different arguments and projects, they use similar strategies to advance their claims. This paper will focus on the way each author strategically uses compare and contrast, cause and effect, and problem-solution to advance their claims and how effective these strategies are used.
One of the most controversial topics today is gun control. In the month of November, 2016, voters will vote for the issue of Gun and ammunition control. Pro and anti-gun supporters have very different opinions on the issue of guns. Gun and anti-gun control laws are extremely controversial in today’s society. Supporters and non-supporters are debating whether guns should be illegal or not. Two writers from “Armed with Reason”, Evan Defilippis and Devin Hughes are opposed to gun control laws and on the other hand, author Phoebe Malts Bovy from New Republic is pro-gun control laws.
If I had to choose which technological invention is the worst, I’d have to choose gun. Gun has done more harm than good by a big margin; History will show the devastation this technological invention has done. Millions of life lost by just pulling a tiny trigger, Guns attracted violence, how easy to point and pull a trigger. Guns made killing easy, it change the way wars were fought and even led to more powerful gun. Some may argue that it’s not the gun but the user, but if guns were never invented we wouldn’t have that argument, Its plain and simple as day, this invention did not benefit our society, It just made wars and violence worse and deadlier, Guns requires less skill than swords and bows, so the use of guns became more popular, which led to world wars. And the end results are bloodsheds and millions of people dead.
Gun control is a very hot topic in politics today. Some people think gun control is necessary to protect the people but nothing could be further from the truth. Gun control needs to be more relaxed if we are to prevent crime from happening at all. If more people are enabled to legally carry guns than more crimes will to stopped before they even happen, creating a better and safer society. No matter how much gun control legislation is passed criminals will still find a way to get ahold of weapons so it is necessary to ensure the American people are armed to fight such people. The truth is that we live in a world which needs guns to protect people. That is why police officers carry weapons and that is why civilians should carry guns themselves.
Hate is a very scary thing and there is much too much of it in the world. I am an object of hate because I am a lesbian. I had a very scary incident a year ago that will haunt me for the rest of my life.