In dealing with gun control, Peggy Noonan in her article “The Culture of Death – And of Disdain” takes a different approach than James Q. Wilson in his article “Gun Control Isn’t the Answer”, although both articles also share similar qualities. Throughout her article, Noonan primarily appeals to pathos by means of emotional exhortations and strong diction, as well as by repeating personal pronouns and recalling experiences. She also appeals to ethos with calls to action and moral statements. Her overall structure includes a great amount of figurative language, including an extended metaphor, repetition, alliteration, and multiple allusions. By doing this, she creates an extremely impassioned and urgent tone to explain how each individual should take
I have always been a proponent of stricter gun control policies. However, my position is not fed by the fact that I am not a gun owner; I know a number of people who own guns, from muskets to semi-automatic rifles like the Colt LE6920, who, like me, are of the opinion that the country, in the wake of the recent mass shootings, should take a more radical approach to the problem of guns. Apparently, my stance on the issue has relatively been biased. Upon going through some of the principal arguments by those in opposition as listed on the Procon.org website, I have found myself looking at the gun policy issue quite differently. I particularly found these three anti-gun policy arguments to be intriguing: gun ownership, not gun control laws, deters crime; gun control laws cannot deter criminals from obtaining guns; and the laws are unnecessary since markedly few people are killed by guns.
Gun control decrease crime. The gun control law should be more strict because it would decrease murders rates, and there would be less killing. There should be more law about gun control from the government. The United States needs strict law of owning a gun. There should be laws that will keep people away from guns.
Gun control laws interfere with the right to have a gun and smudge the people’s feelings and rights of safety. According the the NRA guns are used for self defense around 2.5 million times a year. Many people surveyed have stated, “the police can’t be everywhere every minute of the day to protect us from the dangers”(ProConorg Headlines). 61% of the men surveyed by the Pew Research foundation have concluded that harsher gun laws would make it very hard and difficult to protect their families and homes.
Adolf Hitler has said, “To conquer a nation, first disarm the citizens.” Gun Control is wrong and should not be set into action. First and foremost, if guns were to be banned, criminals would still get their hands on them, leaving law abiding citizens defenseless against illegally armed criminals. For instance, drugs are illegal but that does not stop criminals from making, selling and buying them; it is a big problem in today’s society. Secondly, thorough background checks don’t allow felons to purchase weapons, making their only option to steal one, which is much harder and much more risky.
But for gun enthusiast laws and preventions are an infringement on their freedom and rights. As the Second Amendment states “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.” According to Larry Harris in the Huffpost (Harris 2017) gun advocates say that citizens need the right to be armed to protect the country and that citizens need to own a gun for self-protection as it is stated in the Second
One of the most debated and intense arguments is the issue on gun control and gun policies. Gun control and gun rights is always an emotional topic that has been fought in the political arena for many years, especially during presidential elections. Gun control proponents want to see all guns extinguished and they believe that guns are a key problem to crime, but gun rights advocates believe that the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the Constitution. Gun control is not the solution to limiting or restricting crime. First off, I want to go over the fact that most criminals usually don’t get their guns legally and that by putting forth a law it would not guarantee lower crime rates.
“Anybody who's in favor of gun control is a fucking moron.” Jackie Mason. The preservation of the second amendment is imperative in order for law abiding citizens to protect themselves from criminals and the threat of a tyrannical government. Advocates for gun control use gun violence as their defense asking the government to protect them in the name of public safety. Even though some people believe gun control will improve public safety, gun control hinders public safety and protects the government because gun control does not deter the criminal use of firearms and gun control equals absolute despotism.
In the wake of the mass shooting at a Florida high school the question of gun control has surfaced again. There are two sides of the question, one side proposes that restrictions are placed on guns while the other side believes it is our constitutional right to bear firearms. People that want stricter gun control laws believe it will help reduce crime. Those against gun control believe that owning a gun will help stop crime. Every citizen should be able to carry a gun and defend themselves against people who want to harm them.
About 67% of that 42% claim they own guns for protection reasons (Americans’ Views on Guns). Many people in the United States argue that the control regulations already in place need to become
Gun control also limits our constitutionally derived right to own firearms. If gun control is enforced, law-abiding citizens will be forced to give up their guns and their right to own guns, while many criminals who own guns may illegally keep theirs. As the saying goes “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” Guns are an important aspect of our society in many ways. They allow for protection, recreation, and hunting.
As a common argument in today’s media, many people are familiar with the subject of gun control. For those who are not, Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines gun control as “regulation of the selling, owning, and use of guns” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). Guns are associated with many negative connotations; however, that does not prevent activists from trying to protect the second amendment, also known as the right to bear arms. Should the second amendment be truly be protected? Where there are guns, there is danger; therefore, guns are a gateway to criminalistic behavior.
Are police really just one big gang, or is this just something thought by people who are constantly in the wrong with law enforcement? People tend to feel victimized when they have been doing something wrong and finally get caught for doing those things. Does it just stop there though, or do people who have done nothing wrong also feel intimidated by the police. A gang by defection of the department of justice and the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement states; an association of three or more individuals, members identify themselves by adopting a group identity which they use to create an atmosphere of intimidation, and whose purpose is to engage in criminal activity and uses violence to further its criminal
The majority of Americans that are against stringent gun laws in the U.S. say guns are more widely used in self-defense and that they discourage criminals from committing violent crimes (Celinska, 234). There are two main purposes for owning guns, defense and recreation. Hunters for example would be against gun laws because they use guns for recreational shooting and hunting. Also people that might have grown up in a gun free environment or an antigun culture maybe through higher education would see gun control as more achievable. “Guns don’t kill, people do” according to the NRA and criminals don’t obey laws (Gregg, 68).
Most who support the stricter guns laws believe that the Second Amendment should not just be an open blank option for anyone to own a gun. The gun law supporters feel that if there are more restrictions on firearms, such as who can have them, under what conditions it would cut down on the death crimes but in reality gun control laws do not deter crime; gun ownership deters crime. I agree with the statement from “John Stossel (2008), who is a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist, as well as a journalist and reporter for Fox News Channel, explains that laws against guns are really laws against self-defense, and mandatory gun-free zones are in actuality free crime zones”. Stricter gun laws won’t do anything except leave law abiding citizens with less defense options. In my opinion a law abiding citizen will less likely not break the law and own a handgun if they are banned, but a criminal will.
