Analysis Of Jeffrey Goldberg's Article 'The Case For More Guns'

Jeffrey Goldberg’s Article “The Case for More Guns (and More Gun Control)” he states that multiple examples of shooting where gun control could have been a major factor in preventing these shootings. Goldberg states here that when Tom Mauser became gun-control activists after his son was killed it showed a lot of that emotion that ethos is talking about with the tragedy. There was lot of more push towards more-strict controls on guns that helped shift the cultures keeping. It showed that fact of how it easy it was to get guns for two kids that were not legal in age. Since that event background checks and among other restrictions have been employed. He is saying that it takes a recent tragic event to wake people up and say; this is an example of pathos for having more control on how people get these guns. Later, Goldberg states on that right after the Columbine massacre closed the “gun-show loophole,” but it fail to show on a national level. He then preaches, “The National Rifle Association and other anti-gun-control groups worked diligently to defend the loophole—misnamed. While

As gun advocates have long insisted—suddenly reversed itself and ruled that the individual ownership of handguns was illegal, there would be no practical way for a democratic country to locate and seize those guns. That is why many gun control advocates, and particularly advocates of a total gun ban all together. The U.S. is becoming more like Canada, whe4r there are far fewer guns per capita and where most guns have to be registered with the federal government. To also consider at Canada homicide rate is one-sixth of that of the U.S. barring a decision by the American people and their legislators to remove the right to bear arms from the Constitution, arguing for applying the Canadian approach in the U.S. is