This article provides a clear view on the controversial topic of what the issue is and what is needed to be done in order to combat it. More specifically, they discuss what the government can do about mass shootings. However, she clarifies that the policy makers can seem to figure out a cause for these mass shootings and without that they probably wouldn’t even be able to come up with a valid solution. Some people argue that the cause is the behavior meaning that mental health should be something more people are aware about. However, others believe that the main problem would have to be the fire arms and they fact that it extremely easy to obtain one without a background check when sold by a
This makes it difficult for police to track serial killers and link them to the crimes. Thus, this often leads to higher crime rates among serial killers and places them in a different category. Thus, the nature vs. nurture argument continues to remain prevalent in the discussion regarding serial killers. Some scientists contend that humans are naturally violent and aggressive. Thus, some humans are born with certain genetic traits that make them psychologically unstable and impulsive.
Yes not allowing guns has its positives, but personally I believe they could be very useful if they are used correctly. To every positive there is also bound to be a few negatives to follow. Disadvantages of not having concealed weapons could result in bad situations to an extent of maybe even death. The author writes, “But no matter how trustworthy you might be, you have to reckon with the price we all pay for the thing you enjoy.” Sometimes people just happen to open up the wrong can of worms and get themselves into trouble with dangerous weapons like guns. Without guns, the deer population will increase enormously and rapidly because people will not be killing them off, which could lead to a development of too many deer.
Martin Luther King Jr and Senator Robert F. Kennedy which led to the creation of the Gun Control Act in 1968. Furthermore, there have recently been some mass shooting incidents that have brought about huge debates on the issue of gun control. These debates emphasize the need to strengthen the gun control laws that are currently in place, which are meant to regulate the buying, selling, and owning of gun. Lastly, even though gun control goes against the right given to individuals by the second amendment, having stricter gun control laws is beneficial for the safety of the nation because gun control can significantly decrease the number of deaths that occur because of mass shootings and gun control can also prevent students from shooting up schools. The enforcement of stricter gun control laws would be extremely beneficial for the safety of the people in the United States.
When there are not enough laws concerning guns it can lead to leniency with firearms, too many laws can create problems with those firearms, and coming to a balanced set of laws will improve society in which firearms are concerned. There are pros and cons of gun control as well as many different policies concerning this around the world. Therefore being informed about these various issues will help citizens understand which would be the best policy. There are many citizens and politicians that are in favor of stricter gun control policies, pro-gun control supporters. Pro-gun control supporters are in favor of tighter gun laws because it is believed that there would be a decrease in gun violence, a decrease in accidental gun injury, a reduction in mass shootings, and a reduction in crime if guns were under tighter restrictions.
Dr. James Rachels, in his article “Active and Passive Euthanasia” criticizes the AMA because he believes that passive euthanasia is just as worse as active euthanasia so you should either be for both or against both. His first argument against the AMA’s statement is that if the reason to end someone’s life is to put them out of their pain because there are not any further treatments to alleviate the pain then obviously it would be best to use the method that would end their life the fastest without causing pain. Thus, active euthanasia like a lethal injection would satisfy this reasoning much better than a passive euthanasia method such as a patient refusing treatment and suffering until they die. If you support passive euthanasia for this justification then according to this argument it would not make sense if you do not also support active euthanasia. His second argument is that he believes the AMA’s statement shows that choices in life and death situations are determined with inapplicable points.
I myself find that the facts supporting to abolish the death penalty outweigh any reason to continue to uphold it. With a broken judicial system leading to death row. It is littered with racial and economic hardships inadequacies and flaws innocent people are being sentenced to death court systems bottlenecked with motions and procedures that only prolong the impending doom. Many People argue that the worst of the worst of the worst should be put to death and that there is no reason to hold out with hopes that they will change. Other argue that the we must keep the death penalty for a deterrent.
These debates emphasize the need to strengthen the gun control laws that are currently in place, which are meant to regulate the buying, selling, and owning of gun. Lastly, even though gun control goes against the right given to individuals by the second amendment, having stricter gun control laws is beneficial for the safety of the nation because gun control can significantly decrease the number of deaths that occur because of mass shootings and gun control
Why is destructive ammunition so easy to obtain? What are the motives behind the people who commit such heinous crime? And finally, why is our own political system not doing anything about the laws that could potentially prevent these catastrophes from happening? The answers are not easy but effective strategies can be used to deter these things from occurring so often. According to James Steinberg, a major portion of the problem is coming from the fact that gun control is a major issue in the United States.
Many pro-gun supporters say that banning guns will both “create another potentially large source of organized criminal revenue, as a black market for guns will sure develop”, and “take away yet another piece of our liberty, which is one more step to socialism and totalitarianism” (Messerli). Supporters also say that reasonable gun control and gun safety education can be more enforced, so large-scale weapon bans are not necessary. Law abiding citizens who own guns are able to protect themselves against government tyranny, if issues were ever to arise. Lastly, many supporters of guns state that an attempt to ban guns is a violation of our Second Amendment
Most people today have access to the internet, a great tool when used productively, however there are some who chose to violate the luxury they have been given. People commit crimes such as hacking, scamming and surveying innocent people. All of these potential crimes will pose major issues for all of those involved, especially if the law is not quick to reform when new material emerges. Many areas which have needed law reform include the emergence of surveillance technology, infringements on copyright and intellectual property