Gun Control That Actually Works Analysis

With all the recent gun related crimes and tragedies’ that has happened recently, there are strong calls for government to act for stricter gun control laws. Mr. Alan Berlow wrote an Op-ed essay that was published in the New York Times titled “Gun Control That Actually Works”. Berlow makes the argument that there are control measures in place that works for gun control. In 1934 a measure was enacted into law to control the procurement of weapons which is known as the NFA (National Firearms Act). The NFA outlines the standard for procurement of military grade firearms and any weapon, attachment, or modification that will allow a single person to inflict a large amount of fatalities with in a single attack.

He first states that “there are 86 Americans killed every day with firearms” (Lucas, "New Gun Laws Won't save Lives."). This statement alone should set off some red flags somewhere because this means that the law makers aren’t doing a very good job on what they put in place to keep Americans safe. He follows up by saying “there are approximately 2.5 million deaths in America each year, with approximately 31,000 deaths by firearms. ”(Lucas, "New Gun Laws Won't save Lives.") Again red flags should be shooting up for the law makers, which is where his point is implied.

In his article, “Gun Control Kills,” Jack Hunter tackles the controversial topic of gun control. Hunter makes the point that gun control is in fact bad for the United States and that banning guns would actually lead to more deaths per year, the opposite of the goal for those that support gun control. Hunter does this using a number of argumentative techniques in order to convince his readers that gun control is wrong. Many of the techniques that Hunter uses are effective in attempting to make people believe in his cause, however some of the points that he makes are also ineffective and somewhat discredit his point. There are times in the article in which Hunter shows his own bias towards the subject, and tries to service the article towards

The article denies Obama’s integrity and places credibility on Republican anti-gun regulation perspectives. The article mentions “Obama’s attempts to pass gun control measures through Congress previously have been unsuccessful, and in 2013 he announced 23 executive actions in the wake of the Newtown massacre,” which emphasizes his failures and inability to pass these regulations (Obama). By dramatizing his lack of success, it forces one to believe that gun regulation is futile. The article attempts to discredit liberals with a quote from Mike Huckabee: “Talk of gun control makes the liberals feel warm and fuzzy” (Obama). This mention of liberals will peak the interest of the conservative audience.

Gun Control in the United States Does Gun Control work? ,and if it does work,Does gun control have to be necessary?For those who are unaware gun control refers to laws or policies that regulate manufacture, sale, transfer, possession, modification, and/or the use of firearms. According to CNN 67% of americans support gun control,when research has shown that states with stricter gun control laws have significantly higher homicide rates compared to those of states with lenient gun control laws. When talking about gun control and looking at the homicide rates of states with lenient and strict gun control laws one will realize that gun control does not work. However there are many solutions to lowering the homicide rates in states with high homicide

The second amendment is being abused and misused on how this is supposed to benefit us. Mass shooters will use this right to justify their actions.  Eugene Robinson, an opinion writer of The Washington Post wrote “When the framers wrote of “arms,” they were thinking about muskets and single-shot pistols.   They could not have foreseen modern rifles or high capacity magazine.”

“Our Blind Spot about Guns” Rhetorical Analysis Essay American Journalist, Nicholas Kristof, in his essay, “Our Blind Spot about Guns”, addresses that if only guns were regulated and controlled like cars, there would be less fatalities. Kristof’s purpose is to emphasize how much safer cars are now than in the past, while guns do not have the same precautions. He constructs a compelling tone in order to convince the reader that the government should take more control on the safety of guns and who purchases them. Kristof builds credibility by successfully exerting emotional appeals on the audience, citing plausible statistics, and discussing what could possibly be done to prevent gun fatalities. Kristof begins his essay by discussing how automobile

Looking at the utilitarian approach, it is seen to have significant meaning for both those that are for and against gun control. As the utilitarian theory approach focuses on the theory that “an action is ethical if the good that it is predicted to produce outweighs the bad”. In this case, depending on the perspective of the individual, it can have significantly lead to different conclusions that supports both sides of the gun control debate. Specifically, gun control proponents have argued that the utilitarian approach is justification for gun control as the banning of gun ownership will protect society and make the world a better place through a lower chance of gun violence despite the restraining of civil liberties. On the other hand, gun control

Although the second amendment states all americans have the right to bear arms crime statistics show that we need tighter gun control to lessen the widespread shootings. Gun violence has existed in america

Regulating guns will not stop all of the killings that are occurring in America, and there are better ways to cease the killings than regulating guns. Body Paragraph One: Topic Sentence: Regulating mental health will be more effective in ceasing killings with guns than regulating guns. In an analysis provided, 22 percent of the perpetrators of 235 mass killing, could be considered mentally ill, many of which were carried out with firearms (Qui). Almost 25% of mass shooting killers are being considered mentally ill

The professor and director of the Center for Gun Policy and Research at Johns Hopkins School of Public Health named Daniel Webster, believes that federal universal background checks for gun purchasers would reduce deaths from firearms. He thinks that Individuals with mental illness, criminal records and a history of domestic violence -- as well as those under the age of 20 -- should be barred from purchasing guns, Webster said. In the year of 2007 Missouri repealed restrictive laws, later on the rate for gun homicide had increased to 25 percent. The annual record of deaths from firearms is 31,000, 60 percent is caused by suicide, and there is a small proportion from accidental cause. Another study states that 80 percent of inmates who have

On the issue of gun control, I had always thought along the lines of opposing or supporting the issue but had never thought that there could be another argument different from these two main ones that could be discussed. It was therefore quite refreshing to look at the issue from Novak’s point of view. The fact that he provided evidence to support his claim that law enforcement has worked before in reducing gun violence cases made his article all the more interesting and believable. He shows that the debate on gun control may just have been pointless all this time as the issue that should be discussed is really not whether people should have guns or not but rather how to enforce the law to ensure that perpetrators of gun violence are

The last 18 years have been experienced by too many shootings. We must take action to help stop gun violence. In furtherance of reducing gun violence, we must handle the problem of easy access to guns and address men's mental health. One way to reduce gun violence is to regulate the easy access to guns. In the article," How to Reduce Shootings", by Nicolas Kristoff in The New York Times Kristoff claims how automobiles could kill as many people as guns but they don't because we regulate them and limit easy access to automobiles.

This paper also provides an interesting solution to gun violence; instead of already proven ineffective gun control laws, these authors suggest looking at why these laws are ineffective. Planty, Michael, and Jennifer

“Until it Happens to You” Considering the tragic history of mass shootings in the United States, specifically the most recent at Stoneman Douglass High School, I find the split in gun control to be absolutely riveting. No matter where one stands on the political spectrum, everyone always appears to have something to contribute to the gun control debate. It is evident that Congress must act when examining the seventeen murders at the hands of former Stoneman Douglass student Nikolas Cruz. Guns are more accessible than ever, and this is putting everyone’s lives at risk. A mass shooter wants to cause chaos, perhaps in a separate way than they had intended: after generations of like debates, it is time to talk about the consequences of allowing