...are in agreement or disagreement on allowing student carrying guns on campus. Although Guns shouldn’t be allowed on campus because a campus is considered a safe zone. The state of Texas is considering about having concealed or open carry weapons on campus but many believe it’s a great thing but in reality it’s not due to the fact that It is very rare for a shooting to happen on campus, people with guns around campus can easily escalate, and student will feel unsecure. Over the years it has shown that a campus or university is very safe due to it being a gun free zone. Also it is rare for a shooting to happen on a campus. The reason why it’s rare is because students aren’t allowed to carry weapons around the campus zone. Although there might not be a lot of securities around but having many students in a facility it is hard for them to carry a weapon without going unnoticed. It’s also safe knowing that students that attends college are known to be good students due to the...
Words: 494 - Pages: 2
...Cutting down on violence in the media, and doing something about gun free zones. The first way is Improving school Security. Scm said "Schools should have security entrances with armed guards and metal detectors similar to airports." All schools should have metal detectors at the very least and one to five security guards depending on...
Words: 473 - Pages: 2
...but they are able to get up and walk away” (Duffey) Our youth are not being taught the impact or consequences of real-world actual shootings. It is just a game to them. Does watching this kind of violence eventually teach them to be “mentally ill” as we know it? They do not have the mental capability to understand that killing someone is wrong. Is it instilled in their brain that they can keep coming back with a new life every time they get shot? The common-sense coherence of what is right and wrong is not there. We should be teaching our youth the correct and safe use of firearms instead of letting them believe in made up world rules. So, is mental illness a product of the environment these people are brought up into? Even if it is not, seeing a potential mental illness in a person could prevent these shootings. As John Malcolm states of school attackers, “they are...
Words: 1448 - Pages: 6
...recent Las Vegas shooting? All of these shootings happened in gun-free zones. Having the possession of guns is crucial to keeping this country safe and free. Firstly, they're many laws and acts to restrict unnecessary guns and modifications to them and to keep guns to protect us. Secondly, there are many reasons why we need guns for our safety. Thirdly, gun control and laws have not been proven effective over the years. These three points might change your mind on how you think about guns. The first point to prove that we need guns is because it's the law and also rules to follow when having a gun. The 2nd Amendment states we have the right to bear arms. Even...
Words: 598 - Pages: 3
...Court ruled that the Commerce Clause did not extend to the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990. The case began with Alfonso Lopez, a senior at a San Antonio, Texas high school, carried a concealed weapon into the school and was later charged with the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 which forbid "any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that [he] knows...is a school zone.” Lopez argued that the act, specifically section 922(q) which dealt directly with interstate commerce, was unconstitutional as it exceeded Congress’ regulation power granted under the Commerce Clause. Eventually, the United States government filed a writ of certiorari, arguing that the section was...
Words: 712 - Pages: 3
...The Great Gun Debate Introduction Among the more diverse issues in an already polarized society is a national perspective of guns (Hargrove & Perdue, 2015). The gun debate in the U.S. dates back to the 18th century, when the nation’s founders were crafting the Bill of Rights—the first ten amendments to the Constitution, adopted in 1791 (Smith & Ross, 2013). All gun control debates turn on interpretations of the Second Amendment, the worst written and most bizarre part of the constitution (Eichenwald, 2015). The Second Amendment gave Americans the right to “bear arms;” however, for more than 200 years, people have disagreed over how to interpret the amendment (Smith & Ross, 2013). Heated debates over guns have created division among “we the people.” On one end of the divide are pro-gun extremists. On the opposite end of the divide are anti-gun extremists. Then, there is the rational middle—the group that is often left out of the debate. This group typically consists of average law-abiding citizens who do not believe that Americans should be stripped of their rights to bear arms, but, rather, that some laws should be tightened up to ensure that guns and deadly accessories, such as high-capacity magazines, stay out of the wrong hands. Over the years, numerous mass shootings in schools have forced lawmakers to assess and tighten gun-control laws, which has also reignited the fiery gun debate. This assessment will attempt to uncover a proper course of action via a rigorous...
Words: 3335 - Pages: 14
...Gun Control It has been debated whether or not American citizens should have the right to own firearms. Some may argue that most Americans don’t have the proper gun safety education that should be required before someone owns a gun. Few may even assert that everyone should have the freedom to own guns regardless of their education and experience with firearms. I believe that most Americans don’t take a strong stand on either side of this issue. Nobody wants to completely eliminate all guns in America. Likewise, I don’t think anyone wants to give people full access to guns. The issue that I’m arguing is simply whether or not the government should permit gun control by restricting the use and/or possession of firearms for American citizens. I believe that restricting guns would violate our personal freedom to bear arms. The problem with violence isn’t the gun itself, but the problem rests on the people who choose to use guns to commit acts of violence. To solve the ‘gun abuse’ problem, why doesn’t the government impose stricter consequences for people who still choose to commit acts of violence involving firearms? That way it would only affect the criminals, and the law-abiding citizens could continue to live in freedom. In an article titled “Gun Control: Does it Really Matter?”, Will Fawcett states, “There is no logical reason to believe that making it more difficult or impossible to own or poses guns, would deter individuals who already are taking part in illegal behavior...
Words: 2409 - Pages: 10
...for More Gun Control Justin Sullivan DeVry University Prewriting What is your narrowed topic? Be detailed in your answer. You can use any of the versions you’ve developed for prior assignments. My chosen topic is the for less gun control in our society. Who is your primary audience or reader? Why? Be detailed in your answer about your audience. My paper is written towards members of our society that believe more stringent gun control is needed. However, the paper will be presented to my professor and classmates. In a sentence or short paragraph, what is your thesis statement, including your angle? Write what will appear in your essay. My point is that What topic sentences will you use as the foundation of your communication? (If necessary, add more points.) * * * * What method of organization and development will you use to develop your paragraphs? * Introduction: * * Body: * * * * * Conclusion: No Need for More Gun Control Turn on a television to just about any news channel, or pick up a newspaper, whether it is local or national and you will most assuredly find a segment on some sort of gun violence. This may be a shooting at a movie theater, a busy market place, a gang fight, or God forbid, an elementary school. These events and other similar events have lead to a question that is prevalent across the country: Should there be more gun laws and therefore more gun control...
Words: 2324 - Pages: 10
...lot of American citizens and politicians. We, as European citizens, ask ourselves why. Therefore it’s time to really get to know the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. When the Constitution was signed on September 17, 1787, federalists claimed the new government would only have limited powers. For the critics of the new government, known as the anti-federalists, this wasn’t enough. What they addressed was the fact that the original constitution lacked something to protect the liberties of each individual. One of the things they pleaded for was the right to keep and bear arms....
Words: 1069 - Pages: 5
...There have been many incidents where many students were injured or killed by an attacker in the school and the cops could not respond in time to stop the attacker. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with gun" said Wayne Lapierre, and he is absolutely right (Madhani and Kucinich). By allowing a so called “good guy with a gun” in every school it enables the school to be prepared and stop the attack in its tracks. ”When you take guns out of the hands of good people, you cannot protect good people. Protecting our kids is vital. We should have armed security guards at each school. Security guards work. Important people and important places have armed security. Why not schools?”...
Words: 855 - Pages: 4
...entire day as I worked outside. She sat quietly as I expected her to jump up and shoot the children down the street in a rage, but to my surprise she didn’t budge a hair. Now, the idea that a gun could sprout legs, cock itself and shoot an innocent bystander is just plain silly. In recent times, many people have blamed the gun instead of the shooter for mass shootings or accidents. Many times, it was indeed an accident that could have been avoided. But are these accidents and tragedies cause to eliminate our constitutional right to bear arms? Even though democrats, liberals and left-wing activists believe that gun control is best for America because of these accidental shootings, American citizens still have the right to defend ourselves and our property, women carrying concealed or open can better protect themselves against rapists, murderers and thieves, and of course the Second Amendment gives us the right to bear arms. Democrats and Liberals have been running campaigns non-stop about banning the use of guns by citizens. It seems every website, radio show or Facebook post from them is anti-gun, so why do they want to rid the country of its constitutional right? Gun control by definition is the “government regulation of the sale and ownership of firearms.” (Dictionary.com) The control of guns in America is vital, of course because it prevents people who shouldn’t or are banned from using them to get them easily. For...
Words: 1732 - Pages: 7
...As I sat down to do some research on gun violence, I was searching the Fox News website for information on shootings and suddenly “Breaking News” popped up on my screen, that read “Active shooter at Ohio University”. It seems like mass shootings are becoming more common these days. I can't help but wonder what we can do about it. It turns out that the “shooter” actually used a car and knife to attack people, not a gun like the media stated at first. And do you know what stopped the attacker from killing innocent people? A gun. Guns aren’t the problem, mental health issues and the strict guns laws are a huge part of the problem. Guns can be a tool for safety and if more good guys had guns, we wouldn't have as many mass shootings, banning...
Words: 2153 - Pages: 9
...John Rabe’s influence as a Nazi did provide sanctity (although not fully) for those he took in. When soldiers arrived at the Safety Zone to loot and rape, it was his presence that promoted order. As a result of his standing, the soldiers were forced to leave. Similarly, Hsün Tzu offered the straightening board example (Xunxi: Basic writings), that the crooked nature of the wood was straightened out by external influence. The soldiers lost the good external influence of military law, but the threat of punishment when it came to crossing the Nazi member (important allies to the Japanese), checked them. Yet, it is important to note, atrocities still occurred in the Safety Zone. Being so consumed in their dark passions, soldiers bypassed Rabe and violated those he hoped to...
Words: 1009 - Pages: 5
...What is worse, guns or people that own them? Many people are asking this question, and the answer is neither. Guns are generally used for hunting or defense and are owned by great people. Also, some bad people do happen to own guns (often illegally) and they do bad things with them. But if they did not have a gun, they would use a knife or a bat, guns are just tools. The right for people to bear arms should not be taken away because it is a second amendment right, and when respected and used properly, they are not a danger. So let us talk about who owns guns and why. As of the year 2009 there are 307 million people living in the United States, and as of 2010 300 million of them own guns 100 million of those are handguns. Based on surveys, the following are estimates of private firearm ownership in the U.S. as of 2010: | |Households With a Gun |Adults Owning a Gun |Adults Owning a Handgun | |Percentage |40-45% |30-34% |17-19% | |Number |47-53 million |70-80 million |40-45 million | In the same poll, gun owners were asked why they own guns. 67% stated that they own guns to protect against crime, 66% said target shooting, and 41% said hunting. These being the main reasons people own guns, why should they lose their rights because of a few bad people who do happen to own guns. Based on a...
Words: 2270 - Pages: 10
...ancient ruins. The country offers opportunities for business and trade. San Pedro Sula’s “tax free zone” allows international companies to manufacture goods at attractive rates” Democracy in Honduras Honduras has five registered political parties: the National Party, the Liberal Party, the Social Democrats, the Social Christians and the Democratic Unification. The main parties that have been in power for decades are the National Party and the Liberal Party. Many of their elections have full of controversies. The question of the people of Honduras can elect for their own presidents remains on who you ask. According to the National Democratic Institute, corruption, inequality and insecurity have derailed the progress of Honduras’ democracy to evolve and continue. In 1840, Honduras became fully independent from Spain. In 1941, Honduras joined the allied nations in the World War II after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. In 1981, Honduras established itself as a democratic country. It held its first elections where Roberto Suazo Cordova became the first president. The elections of 2009 left the country with more problems unsolved. Manuel Zaleya was forced into exile and Roberto Micheletti was appointed as the president. The main focus that we need to put our energy into is the inequality sector. Citizens in this country don’t feel safe in their neighborhoods. The LGBTI community doesn’t feel safe because they murdered due to their sexuality views. We need to campaign for the rights of this...
Words: 1917 - Pages: 8
