In James Q. Wilson’s New York Times article, “Just Take Away Their Guns,” Wilson sufficiently reasons how the elimination of illegal guns on the streets should be the central focus in determining the limits regarding American gun control regulations which are frequently debated in our modern world. While Wilson makes an effective argument, at times, he racially profiles which is a definite form of deceptive reasoning; in addition, many of Wilson’s arguments lack the elaboration he needs to avoid making hasty assertions.
Wilson argues in his essay that not allowing people to buy guns will have no effect on the illegal use of guns, which in essence, is the sole reasoning for wanting to eliminate guns in the first place. He makes the claim that about two-hundred million American citizens own a gun. These guns, though, are not the ones that are generally used for unlawful acts, but rather those that are stolen, borrowed, or privately purchased. Wilson then makes the point that an increase in these control regulations would take a toll on none other than those law abiding citizens that own these guns more for self-defense purposes. Wilson first extends the argument that, “Our goal should be to reduce the number of people who carry guns unlawfully, especially in places- in streets, in taverns- where the mere presence of a gun can increase the hazards we all face.” By beginning his argument with a clear, concise thesis such as this, Wilson begins to setup an organized structure for his argument. Through a clearly planned construction consisting of claims followed by data and counterclaims followed by rebuttals, Wilson makes his ideas easy to follow by this systematized set up. This flow makes his ideas more sinuous which contributes to the cohesiveness of his overall argument. This structure makes an argument that easily understood and followed by his target