One of the arguments Obama makes in his speech targets the need for laws regulating gun safety. He begins by stating that thoughts and prayers are not enough. This is because they do not represent the grief and anger, that demand to be felt, nor do they change anything. He feels it has become routine when one of these shootings occurs and that we come to give a cavalier response. He feels we should politicize it and make changes to laws to make them safer, since it should not be that easy to get a gun in the United States. To support his arguments he criticizes that a lot of money has been spent to try and stop terrorism, yet congress will not allow to try and stop mass shootings. He mentions that when things like mines, cars, or even roads …show more content…
He argues that America is in need of more laws in order to ensure gun safety is honest and correct. For example, a lot of innocent people have died by consequence of unregulated gun possession, and more enforcement should lower events like these. However, his analogy to terrorism in this argument is not really stable. Firstly, because he compares mass shootings to terrorism, it makes it seem as if they are not far apart. However, terrorism is when people not from the U.S. try to harm American residents for the sole reason that they are American. Also, it is quite obvious that there will be more gun victims than terrorist victims over the past 10 years since terrorism is not as common in the U.S. especially in a short period of time. Anyway, his point was made and it got through to many, but he never mentioned what these laws should or would look like. He assures they will save lives, but never specifies at what cost or extreme. He does not give an idea of what these laws should enforce or regulate and this leaves a kind of blank ending to his argument. It is understood that guns are not safe, and he makes that point very clear, however he does not give an understanding to what will work to make them
She challenges the idea of all people owning guns and argues instead of guns, people should seek safer methods of protections (ie: knives and dogs). She states that overall guns are not
Passing gun control legislation that creates a universal background check and gun database system as well as passing mental health legislation that improves the health care system’s protocols and policies for assisting people with mental health disorders and that enacts counseling programs in communities and schools will decrease the likelihood of mass shootings in schools. The United States is bitterly divided. Issues of great concern, such as the rise of mass shootings, are partisanized. Both sides of the debate will not comprise or listen to what their opponents have to say. Groups from both sides can only agree that one innocent life taken from gun violence is one too many.
During Barack Obama’s two terms as president of the United States, he has taken many executive actions. A lot of these have been controversial and led to backlash that he was overstepping his bounds. Most recently, President Obama announced the measures he’s going to take in order to help fight gun violence. He has already received criticism from many in the GOP, who claim these actions are not justified and he is infringing on the liberty of many Americans. These actions are warranted, because the gun violence epidemic puts many Americans in danger, and President Obama has the right to take actions to protect the security of American citizens, so long as the actions do not infringe on their rights.
To understand the extent of how common mass shooting and gun violence is in our nation and why it feels like the nations is numb to gun violence, president Obama in his last national, which he was addressing the gun violence tragedy at Umpqua Community College, Roseburg, Oregon, said, “The reporting is routine. My response here at this podium ends up being routine. The conversation in the aftermath of it. We've become numb to this.” If the president expressed his feeling towards the frequency of gun violence tragedy and how predictable giving a national eulogy was, then it would be safe for me to assume that gun violence is a national issue that needs to be addressed and since nothing has changed so far, it is evident that the presidents speech is not as impactful towards law makers and the
One weakness in Kristof’s essay, is that he wants guns to be sensibly regulated like cars. But not all the regulations enforced on cars are 100% safe, just like some of the ideas that were proposed for gun safety. Overall, Kristof has a valid argument but some points in his essay could use some better thinking. To sum up, Kristof believes guns should be regulated just like cars have been over the years.
What’s missing from the typical kindergartener’s backpack? A gun. The ultimate solution to gun violence is more guns, isn’t that obvious? We are in need of guns everywhere to the point where our nation needs armed guards in every school. They say the more guns we have, the more gun violence there is, but in fact it does the complete opposite and solves gun violence.
Imagine enjoying a nice party at your local cabana, only for you to hear a loud bang, and look over to see your friend lying on the ground, dead. This problem you are facing is known as gun control, and is a issue that has faced the U.S for many years. gun control is the debate on whether or not laws around guns should be tightened or not. Today, I will prove to you what gun control is, who is affected by it, and what we can do to solve it. Gun control is a problem that tends to occur very often in the past few years, and is affecting the U.S very badly.
The PBS program “Gunned Down: The power of the NRA” highlighted how the NRA continues it’s stranglehold on the government and gun policies. It is quite clear that gun control advocates attempt to play off the emotion of citizens whereas pro gun advocates fear the public into believing the government is attempting to steal their guns and liberties. The side of the gun control advocates can be seen through the likes of President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. Conversely, the pro gun effort is shown through Ringleader Wayne LaPierre who continues to save the NRA and second amendment rights. President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden were both portrayed as compassionate, caring individuals that were fighting for a life or
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
Gun control is necessary, and delay means more death and horror”. We as a nation need to think about the dangers that guns convey in this society. We need to think about the safety of our children, and not in the economic gains. I know this is a nation whose one of main incomes comes from the selling of arms, however, is money more important than a human life? Guns should not have the destiny of life in his trigger, no.
In today’s society, one of the most alienating issues in American politics is gun control. More specifically, the issue is whether or not guns should be banned in the United States. Some people would say that guns should be banned because it would reduce crime as a whole and keep citizens safer. These people, enthusiasts of stricter gun laws, fear being safe in their country where there are so many people who have access to guns. Opponents of this argument, however, also fear losing safety.
According to Nicolas Kristoff in "How to Reduce Shootings", tightening gun laws would
Within the first paragraph there isn’t a clear thesis, it is displaying opinionated questions instead of proven facts. There are too many rhetorical questions throughout the paper. It would be better if the author narrowed down the idea of gun control to one topic for example there position on gun control and then find sources that agree. That way there is a definite topic not just the arguments from each side of gun control. Since the topic is so controversial the author has to decide which way to go.
Ever since the inception of this country 240 years ago, guns have been an integral part of the American identity; a sense of lawlessness, individualism, personal autonomy and freedom. They were the tools that liberated us, and gave us independence over a tyrannical, unrepresentative empire. However, in more recent years, these tools have been used more and more frequently in mass shootings, some of which are occurring at schools, targeting teachers and children. Since the infamous shooting at Columbine High School 19 years ago, we have had several shootings at schools, and we tend to get “thoughts and prayers”, a gesture with good intentions, but little actual progress made. This problem can be contributed to the increasing power of guns, and a lack of mental health coverage, gun
Everyday in the United States, ninety families are changed forever; guns claim an average of ninety lives every day in the United States, 33,000 lives in a single year. Gun control has been a debate in the United States for many years and is constantly thrusted back into the public’s attention by horrific shootings. These shootings constantly cause individuals to petition the government to place stricter and stricter regulations of guns. However, these policies cannot be the solution to this problem. To determine a solution that will be both effective and constitutional, we must look at statistics and research that has been conducted to determine the best course of action.