...name GOVT XXX Professor XXX date To Ban or Not to Ban Assault Weapons? That is the Ultimate Question… 1966, twenty-five year old Charles Joseph Whitman climbed to the top of the clock tower in Austin and killed sixteen and injured thirty innocent students at the University of Texas. 1991, George Hennard, thirty-five, drove up to the Luby’s Cafeteria in Killeen, Texas and opened fire on forty innocent patrons. Twenty-three of Hennard’s shots were fatal. 1999, citizens in the small Colorado County of Douglas were mortified after witnessing the massacre of thirteen students at Columbine High School at the hands of Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. 2007, the campus of Virginia Tech was forever changed when twenty-three year old Seung-Hui Cho who opened fire killing thirty-two students and teachers. 2012, Adam Lanza shocked the entire world when he took the lives of twenty students and six teachers at an elementary school in Connecticut (CNN). Horrific, terrifying, and saddening all describe the above-mentioned events. And as would be expected, each one of these events brought forth the question, “Where does the America draw the line between personal freedoms and the safety and well-being of her citizens?” The Second Amendment promises, “[…] the right of people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” But, the recent shooting in Connecticut has caused the extremely emotionally charged arguments both for and against the ban of assault weapons to resurface within the United States...
Words: 2236 - Pages: 9
...02/07/2013 GOV 100 Paper Assignment #2 Gun Control: - S.150 - Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 Connecticut December 2012, a Bushmaster AR-15 assault weapon was involved in the deaths of twenty children. Colorado, an AR-15 assault rifle was involved in the killing of twelve innocent civilians at a movie theater. A TEC-DC 9, Hi-Point 995 Carbin, and a Savage 67H shotgun involved in killing eleven high school students along with one high school teacher in Colorado. The fundamental question here, is that why are such powerful assault weapons in the hands of civilians? Most Americans are against the possession of assault weapons in the hands of the civilians. Established in 1791, The 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights gives citizens the right to bear arms. The founding fathers had intended for American citizens to have the right to bear arms to protect themselves from a tyrannical government regime. Which was a legitimate concern during that time period that does not uphold presently. However, throughout history the American government makes changes to the constitution as the country goes through economic expansion and technological progress. A fine example is the 1965 voting act, which outlawed discriminatory voting. It was indeed a necessary and important act implemented to uphold the ideal of equality among all American citizens. As time and circumstances change, so must the terms and conditions that govern them. Essentially, the interpretation of the constitution must...
Words: 1423 - Pages: 6
...saying, “Facts don’t care about your feelings.” This argument heavily applies to the concept of a gun ban. Shootings are beginning to become commonplace, and hardly elicit shock in the news nowadays. The death of an innocent human being, especially that of a child in the case of school shootings, is unbelievably tragic and disgusting. This truth applies to both sides of the debate over gun control; both sides want to eliminate gun violence to prevent the deaths of innocent people. However, controversy arises over how to address the issue. The idea of a gun ban splits the United States, and both sides act passionately based on their beliefs. According to “Public...
Words: 1118 - Pages: 5
...The debate surrounding gun control is one that can be very emotional and is often fueled by anger. This makes it an argument that is hard to balance if that emotion isn’t utilized effectively. In her piece “Get a Knife, Get a Dog, but Get Rid of Guns” columnist Molly Ivins fails to properly utilize emotion in a way that gets the reader on her side. In the article “The Progressive Gun-Control Charade” law professor and author Nicholas Johnson stays level-headed which, ultimately, works to his advantage in making him more agreeable. Both writers manage to add something to the discussion; however, Johnson argues his case just a bit better. Ivins’ clearly states her case: get rid of guns – all of them. While her unwavering conviction condemning the usage of guns entirely can be considered admirable, her overpowering anger works against her. She puts herself on one side of the extreme in such an aggressive way it alienates herself from being understood by the other...
Words: 669 - Pages: 3
...Gun Control: American Gun Laws Need Reform Roderick D. Harris Capella University Gun Control: American Gun Laws Need Reform At the national level, the issue of gun control has been in the spotlight for the last 50 years. The conversation seems to pick up or lose steam depending upon current events. In more recent years, the barrage of mass murders carried out with the use of assault-style weapons have fueled the fire and reopened the public debate. In 2012, President Obama and his administration made a strong push toward reform of current laws on gun control but were met with hard opposition and their efforts failed. Many states have developed their own gun controls in the absence of federal statues, but these new reforms do not go far enough in most cases and the variances between state laws add to the confusion around developing comprehensive reform at the federal level. Strict gun control should at the least consist of full background checks, a ban on assault-style weapons and large-capacity magazines for ammunition. Congressional leaders should take the first step toward reform with a bi-partisan approach to a sweeping legislation. Strict gun control with a ban on assault-style weapons will reduce violence and shootings of mass murder in the United States (U.S.). The fewer the assault weapons and large-capacity magazines in our society will provide a greater opportunity for survival and reduced by-stander casualties during random acts of violence and mass shootings...
Words: 1577 - Pages: 7
..."The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a Good Guy with a gun." - Wayne Lapierre. Our founding fathers would agree with this statement; as firearms were a tool that brought about the birth of the United States from the grip of tyranny. Which is why they chose to include the right to bear arms in the Bill of Rights. Since then however, many people that call themselves Americans wish to dispose of this Right. The right that gives Americans the power to defend themselves, their family or friends, their property, and most importantly their civil rights. Whoever apposes this view, has the ultimate warped view of reality, due to the arguments they make, and the statistics that do not back them up. This is why everyone should appose gun...
Words: 968 - Pages: 4
...All around the country, people are debating whether or not to ban guns altogether because they infer that it will cause a crime drop, cause less gun related deaths, and make people less violent. The two sides of the debate are those who are for having guns banned, and those who are against having them banned. I am against having guns completely banned because they are a great protection against people who are trying to harm you, they are a great learning tool, and gun owners are less likely to have their houses invaded. Let’s talk about why people need these weapons in their homes. From 2003 to 2007, there was 3.7 million robberies that occurred while the homeowner was at their home. In that same time frame, 2.5 million home robberies were stopped with a weapon. That shows that if had a gun in your home at the time of the robbery, it can easily be stopped. These weapons provide the best protection you can have because the police are not always going to be around to save you can sometimes, you are required to take matters into your own hands. Now what about the responsibility that comes with owning a dangerous weapon?...
Words: 578 - Pages: 3
...Gun Control Team Debate Paper BCOM/275 May 7, 2013 Gun Control Gun control is a hot topic in the United States with primarily two sides of the conversation advocating for either more control of guns or more freedom of guns. The current laws on gun control or gun rights are disagreed upon by these individuals essentially based on the interpretation of such gun control laws. Firearms and the effects of gun rights has many cases that call for the strictest form of gun control. Some of these instances involve elementary school shootings, shootings at theaters, and even shootings on military installations by military members. The 2nd Amendment in the constitution has long been the proof of rights for citizens to bear arms to defend themselves from tyranny. Gun rights supporters say firearms should be unrestricted as it allows for self-defense in the case of another individual holding a weapon. Gun control supporters state that less regulation on gun control does not allow the government to provide its role of security because of it. The statistics for gun ownership in America are interesting to look at. For example, in the United States the average gun ownership per 100 people is 88.8, the highest of all other countries. Both sides of the argument have valid points, however it is important to dive deeper into each argument to analyze the logic and statistics involved in each argument. Major Gun Control Arguments Every day there are a countless instances that show that...
Words: 2155 - Pages: 9
...Assault Weapons Ban Within the past few years there has been several mass shootings with in the United States like Sandy hook and Columbine. These crimes were done assault weapons, due to these crimes the proposal of an assault weapons ban is being brought up. This interests me as an active gun owner and activist. But with as much of an unbiased view I look for the answer. Should there be a ban on assault weapons? The most popular method for attempting to reduce violent crimes would be gun control. The idea for an assault weapons ban is on the rise. The recent proposal of an assault weapons ban is not the first within the U.S. Back in 1994 there was a federal assault weapon ban (Warrick). This ban was eventually repealed in 2004. This previous ban banned military style weapons with high volume magazines. With the thought of these bans brings up a question, is it constitutional for these bans. The second amendment gives U.S. citizens the right to bear arms. But with this right comes restrictions, it doesn’t mean that a citizen can waltz around with a firearm anywhere they please. Also there are restrictions on who can and cant own certain or any fire arms like felons and the mentally ill (Kelly). With the idea of gun control and assault weapons bans it’s to reduce the frequency of violent crimes committed with firearms. This comes from the idea that firearms are a more dangerous and lethal weapon compared to other possible weapons. But gun use and possession is a double...
Words: 1305 - Pages: 6
...1. The NRA deals with many different issues related to guns and gun control. The NRA has fought for their right to have any type of ammunition in their arsenal while the opposing public wishes to have certain ammunition banned which means some guns will be useless. The opposing public is also against the use of large magazine guns, which are usually machine guns, banned with the argument that no one needs a machine gun to hunt. NRA also fights for the people’s right to carry a handgun for personal protection while also fighting the laws that force people to register and license for guns which had to be paid for and that you had to buy a case for transportation and storage which is further money. A.2. The NRA supported the 21 emergency powers laws which are against the restriction of any fire arm or ammunition in the case of an emergency which became popular after Hurricane Katrina when the superintendent called a cons faction to prevent tyranny of the powerful during this time of chaos. The twelve castle law supports the law that if an intruder invades one’s domain, than any manner of force maybe used without liability of the owner. The seven range protection laws protect gun ranges from noise complaints. A.3. The NRA goes to extreme lengths to defend the right to bear arms as they virtually oppose every form of gun regulation, which include and are not restricted to: owning assult weopans, retention of databases of gun purchases, background checks, and changes in the registration...
Words: 870 - Pages: 4
...own firearms and enjoy their recreational uses. Due to the multiple conflicting arguments for and against the owning of guns many turn to powers above themselves such as the government to regulate gun use. When a cause that is so vast in the distance between its’ opposing sides we must ponder, does legislation for or against gun control really obtain its intended effect. In a literal sense, gun control and legislation does not have enough effect on overall crime rate to be the number one focus in the reduction of crime. The debate on gun control is an ongoing battle which has continued to span many decades. Some feel they need more gun laws to protect us while others feel that they need more guns in our possession to protect us. There has been very limited data available to determine whether gun laws or guns themselves that positively impact crime statistics. There is a school of thought that states that have passed conceal to carry laws would lower crime rates. Over the last twenty years there have been 10 states to pass new CCW laws. Oddly enough the intended overall impact of CCW laws has had very little effect on gun ownership. In a 2001 study by Mark Duggan takes an in-depth look at perceived fallacies regarding gun control and their effects. In regard to CCW laws and their effect Duggan states, “If the option to carry a firearm increased the perceived benefit associated with owning a gun, then one would expect to find an increase in the fraction of...
Words: 1492 - Pages: 6
...Case Analysis of ban of tobacco advertising in India Here is the brief background information. On Feb 6, 2001 Indian government announced they were going to enforce a ban regarding tobacco advertising in their country. Banning included barring tobacco industries from advertising their products, sponsoring sport or cultural events. The ban was aimed to discourage young mind in India to take part in smoking. The ban, however, heated a debate between the supporters of tobacco companies and the opposition parties. In this paper, I will summarize the arguments that support the ban on tobacco advertising in India and the arguments that oppose the ban. In addition, I will discuss the conflict of interest issue pertaining to Indian government as well as I will describe my opinion on what governments should do in regards to tobacco advertising. 1. Summarize the arguments in favor of the ban on tobacco advertising in India To begin with, the advocates of the ban argued that this action of government was nothing unconstitutional. The government, in fact, has the right to interfere since their main concern was their citizen well-being. They gave this example. We know that guns are bad, so every nation has banned the public advertisement against guns so why tobacco should has a special privilege? Secondly, they used statistic from World Health Organization (WHO). They pointed out that over 3 million were killed by consuming tobacco products in 1990 and the death rate increased to 4.023...
Words: 927 - Pages: 4
...Gun Control Gun control is one of those debates that seems to never go away. This is most likely due to the fact that on any given night a person can turn on the TV and see a report of a gun-related death or crime on the news. Gun control advocates take these instances and immediately declare that gun control laws need to be strengthened or that guns should be outlawed completely. While this may seem like a rational reaction and a solution to the problem, upon further investigation it is discovered that this might not solve the problem at hand. The solution to preventing crimes involving guns is not enacting stricter gun laws, but addressing the problems with the individuals that commit the crimes. As stated before, many people believe and argue that by enacting stricter gun laws and regulations the crime rate and gun death total will decrease. This argument makes sense in theory, until you take into consideration the individuals who are committing the crimes in the first place. The people who go out and deliberately kill someone or use a gun to aid in a crime are not law-abiding citizens in the first place. In most cases, the individual uses a gun that they did not legally obtain meaning that they either stole it from an individual that did or they acquired it through some sort of black market. How will making gun laws more strict help stop an individual that is going to acquire the gun illegally in the first place? According to Stranger, the percentage of crimes that are...
Words: 1257 - Pages: 6
...Arguments on Gun Control Arguments on Gun Control Introduction Gun control is law and policy which has been developed for the purpose of restricting the import, production, shipment, possession, use and sale of the firearms. There are variations in the laws and policies of gun control around the globe. There are strict gun control policies in United Kingdom. On the other hand, the gun control policies in United States are modest. Many people claim that the gun control policies are very effective and there should be strict control on the implementation of these policies. On the other hand, a group of people thinks that the gun control policies are not so effective and there should be no strict policies on the firearms. Thus, the both sides provide their arguments on the issue of gun control. The main aim of this paper is to persuade against the policies of gun control. The paper is comprised of both the arguments in favor and against of the gun control policies. Discussion It is so easy to understand that without guns or rifles, killing of criminals would have been much more difficult to consummate, which is sometimes hard to explain how it is possible that guns are legal in the largest and most powerful democracy in the world. But it is undeniable that easy access to firearms greatly facilitates this sinister task (Amo, 1989). The criminals have committed one of the latest killings with firearms that shook Americans, 14 Dead Colombine students in 1999...
Words: 2865 - Pages: 12
...is an incident involving multiple victims of gun violence(“Gun Control Pros and Cons”). The Columbine Massacre was one of these mass shootings. It occurred on April 20, 1999 in Littleton, Colorado by two high school boys. They chose to do this because they were bullied in high school. This incident left fifteen people dead and twenty-four people injured. The guns used during the shooting were illegally acquired. This is just one significant example of a mass shooting in the United States. Gun laws for possession, carrying, acquiring, buying, selling, and distributing will vary from state to state, some may be broader or more limited to existing Federal Gun Laws. Firearm Licensees are subject to the Gun Laws of the state where they are in rather than the state where the firearm permit was issued. In Pennsylvania there is no permit or registration to buy or own a gun. Known as the "gun show loophole,"...
Words: 731 - Pages: 3
