All Nonfiction Bullying Books Academic Author Interviews Celebrity interviews College Articles College Essays Educator of the Year Heroes Interviews Memoir Personal Experience Sports Travel & CultureAll Opinions Bullying Current Events / Politics Discrimination Drugs / Alcohol / Smoking Entertainment / Celebrities Environment Love / Relationships Movies / Music / TV Pop Culture / Trends School / College Social Issues / Civics Spirituality / Religion Sports / Hobbies
- Summer Guide
- College Guide
- Author Interviews
- Celebrity interviews
- College Articles
- College Essays
- Educator of the Year
- Personal Experience
- Travel & Culture
- Current Events / Politics
- Drugs / Alcohol / Smoking
- Entertainment / Celebrities
- Love / Relationships
- Movies / Music / TV
- Pop Culture / Trends
- School / College
- Social Issues / Civics
- Spirituality / Religion
- Sports / Hobbies
- Community Service
- Letters to the Editor
- Pride & Prejudice
- What Matters
I started off my research on this paper looking at both sides of the Gun Control argument. After doing research on both sides I decided to pick the pro-gun side. There were multiple strong arguments throughout recent books I have read just to name one, A Raisin in The Sun. There were also numerous accounts of factual websites that helped me decide my decision. The pro-con website gave both sides of the story and was a big factor during this process. A recent interview with our House Speaker Paul Ryan explained how essential it is to arm teachers instead of arming someone like Nikolas Cruz from the recent Parkland Shooting. A book called The Hunger Games was a good example why gun laws would be a bad idea. Research Evidence like this is what helped with which side to pick when learning about this topic.
There is a lot of controversy over what the laws for guns should be. This topic is hard to truly understand unless research about guns and their effect is done right. Having an unbiased opinion about what gun laws would give the best chance at getting the most out of research. There is a lot of mixed opinions and there is a lot of people that are 50/50 about what should be banned and what shouldn’t. One thing that is true about America, is that no matter what law is made, there will never be 100% agreement on what congress says. So making gun laws can be hard, but that shouldn’t mean to get rid of all guns in general. A weapon is a weapon it doesn’t have to be a gun. There are still things to be put in place but things to be left alone. A couple of things that aren’t necessary are weapons not just made for self- protection. Self- protection will become a big deal later on in this research paper. But if a weapon’s purpose is to kill as fast as it can then it’s not necessary to own that weapon. Laws need to put in place that don’t take away guns, but also don’t allow guns to threaten the safety of public events. Multiple sources show that guns in some cases have done good and are a necessity to survival. Guns have also had times where they’ve seemed like the worst thing on earth.
More gun laws will not change the epidemic of shootings in America. Lately, one of the biggest topics in America is the argument about guns and whether we should tone down the use them. They should not be taken away from American citizens because of the number of cons that would come from that is greater than the number of cons if guns were left in their rightful spot. A complete gun ban may not be the solution. This type of ban would restrict and remove guns from American citizens that lawfully obtain them, license them and use them in the proper safe ways. This type of ban would not be effective against stopping guns from getting into the hands of those that want to use them for harmful purposes such as robbery and murder. Currently, there are enough illegal ways to obtain weapons such websites, the black market or having someone you know to purchase them for you. So passing a law that is banning guns from lawful citizens would not be an as effective deterrent as it could be.
There are also ongoing discussions happening about putting into place a restriction that would ban assault weapons. Even if a complete gun ban was made then that would only take the guns away from the people that use them for good and leave guns that are illegally owned in the hands of the people that use them for harmful purposes. Ar restriction that people want to put on a specific type of weapon is a ban on all assault type weapons. The most popular assault gun is the AR-15. Gun users like them as they are customizable in many ways. I think of these like the same marketing as owning a Jeep in Colorado. There are those that buy Jeeps because they can customize them to fit what their need is. The AR-15 is not only just customizable, but also is effective when used to stop a home invasion. Some people may think that an assault weapon is unnecessary to stop a home invasion; however my thought is different. When there are three or more people that come in your home or property uninvited, a single shot weapon may not be enough. There are a plethora of stories where the use of an AR-15 has saved someone's life during a home invasion because it simply had more firepower than the attackers. This has shown to both be a deterrent in some instances by scaring them away and more deadly for the attackers in other instances. Now if assault weapons were banned, then the homeowner would only have a pistol to defend himself against three other armed men significantly crushing his odds of defense. This is just one example of a gun saving an innocent human life instead of taking one. There’s a saying that states “ If guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns”. This is very true in numerous of cases. A statistical case study done in 2013 found that in the years dating from 1980 up until 2009, the results of the study showed that assault weapons had little effect on murder rates statewide. The study also showed that locations with a “carrying concealed laws” had higher rates for murder related crimes. (ProCon) Gun Control will only make the problem worse than what it was.
Corresponding to innocent people, anyone would want a sense of safety by owning a gun. Gun laws would deny people that feeling If guns were no longer allowed in public (where most large shootings happen) then how would people ever feel safe knowing they can’t help themselves in a life or death situation; because they followed the law and kept their gun at home or even worse don’t own one anymore. There is not a way to stop gun crime without compromising the basis on which this country is founded, which is the right to bear arms. Many discussions try to define what is the right to bear arms mean. To look at this, you need to look at the timeframe in American History that is was written and how it has served the country in which it protects. This established keystone that if demolished, would deteriorate the well-founded strength of this country is the second amendment which 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.". If American citizens were no longer equipped to defend themselves against a possibly one-day dictatorship, it would be impossible to come back from such tragedy.
Another example that shows that protection in your home is necessary is from the book A Raisin in the Sun is when an African American family called the Younger’s finds a house in a white neighborhood that they decide to move into. When the Younger’s move in the white neighbors do not like it and try to intimidate them to leave. They were threatened to leave and were serious threats were made about their entire family’s safety. A certain situation like this shows why having a weapon such as a firearm in your home would be necessary because without one it makes a household almost defenseless against such a hostile environment.
There are times that weapons are not only used for protection against other people, but also needed to survive. Survival in the wilderness or in the ocean. In addition to safety against threats, in the book A Old Man and the Sea Santiago is an old man in his 80’s that catches the fish of his dreams but he is far out from the shore. He has to defend himself from the sea’s wildlife on the long journey back. It takes all of his strength from Santiago to make it back to shore. Sharks are biting off what Santiago has earned when he has to tie the Marlin to the side of the boat because it was too big to be inside of the boat. All he had was a harpoon to defend himself. The harpoon gave him a sense of hope in a very dangerous situation. He ended up surviving, but without that harpoon to defend himself, he would have most definitely not have survived that night.
In the book The Great Gatsby Nick and Gatsby both used to be in the military and have experience with guns. But George who was told by Tom that Gatsby killed his wife, killed Gatsby out of anger and revenge. No one knows what laws there are on guns in the fictional city that they live in, but gun laws or not that murder was inevitable and he would’ve killed Gatsby no matter what. This shows that if someone wanted to do something bad enough, the law wouldn’t mean anything at that point. The punishment is for some reason worth it to them. So making a law against a gun is just another way people are going to break the law.
Taking the above examples into current times and the recent events of student’s used guns against other students with the intent of doing the most harm possible just because the student with the gun feels helpless or powerless. This is finally getting the attention of governmental officials and is the start of discussions around what do the student want and are they part of the solution. A recent article from CNN showed House Speaker Paul Ryan said, “Of course we want to listen to these kids, but we also want to make sure that we protect people's due process rights and legal constitutional rights while making sure that people who should not get guns don't get them". He also said later in the interview that as a parent he would want teachers armed in schools to protect his own child. This is the speaker of the house that also wants more firearms to protect the nation. Paul Ryan is listening to the people and does, in fact, realize the movement that is going on with nationwide school walkouts but also has to remain firm knowing the massive effects taking away a citizen’s defense can have This is what keeps them safe. Taking away guns from people that use them for good will not take the guns away from the people that use them for bad. But arming people with guns that will use them for good intentions can stop people using them for bad.
If guns were banned and only the government and powerful people that were considered smart enough to decide who should or should not have weapons, it may be that we find ourselves living in a world that resemble the book and movie Hunger Games. The whole main problem of the Hunger Games story was that the less wealthy majority doesn’t have anything to fight back against the corrupt leader and his ruthless government. Any rebellious act was shot down instantly and punishable by anything he decided and some decisions showed no value for the human life. Let's just say that the government chooses to only ban AR-15’s, they would still be massively outgunned by their government. This is why if gun restrictions in America were put in place then if the leader was elected somehow such as the one in The Hunger Games, it would ruin the U.S. and we would lose all of what the country is based on; freedom.
All things considered, a gun ban will have an immense backlash in America and could send the discussions into the wrong direction. The whole point of U.S. Citizens having the right to bear arms is to prevent a corrupt government from taking over the country. A weapon ban on guns could be over reaching as it limits the ability for people to protect themselves from those have access to weapons such as guns through either illegal means or because they are deemed powerful or smart enough to have the gun. It can create inequality such as what happened in The Hunger Games when people were in the factions or in the book A Raisin in the Sun when whites were a group and African American were a group and one had power over the other. Whether it's Santiago defending his life against sea life or the Younger family in fear for the life because of racial discrimination guns are still a need in America and something that can’t be stricken of the American people. The solution is discussions, looking for the root causes of why people use weapons to harm those around them. Is it mental illness, loss of the sense of community, violent video games or social media and wanting to imitate the bad to become famous. These are just few other areas that are interwoven into society and that need to be included in the discussion about weapons and how guns are used. It is a right, not a privilege.
Gun Control - ProCon.” Should More Gun Control Laws Be Enacted in the United States?, 7 Oct. 2017, 6:21 PM PST.
Walsh, Deirdre. “Ryan: 'We Shouldn't Be Banning Guns for Law-Abiding Citizens'.” CNN, Cable News Network, 27 Feb. 2018.
Salinger, J.D., The Catcher in the Rye. New York, NY. Little Brown & Company.
Hemingway ,Ernest. The Old Man and the Sea. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1952. 1955.
Hansberry, Lorraine. A Raisin in the Sun. The Compact Bedford Introduction to Drama. 6th ed. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2009. Print.
Collins, Suzanne. The Hunger Games. New York: Scholastic Press, 2008. Print.
Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. New York: Scribner, 1995. Print.