According to the article, the author suggested that passing more laws is not the useful solution of decreasing criminal rate. That is true the existence of estimate 260 million guns in the country raised the shooting death rate. We might build some places gun-free, but we cannot destroy all the guns. The killer can still bring guns to the gun-free zones from other places. In addition, the author suggested we should focus on dealing with dangerous and unstable personalities.
The people who want to go out and hurt someone obviously have it in their head to start off with, so they will find a way to get a gun or hurt someone in a different way, taking away gun rights isn’t going to stop people from killing if that’s what their initial intentions are in the first place. Adding to it, many Americans believe that that taking away gun rights is unconstitutional. “This is a freedom that Americans have acquired over time, but by banning guns it takes that freedom away, and thus going against the declaration of independence because it is a law that is restricting the people from their rights to own a weapon for protection.” (Debate). The biggest upset about the taking away guns from our people is the fact that it goes against everything America has always bragged out being, the land of the free.
"’Make no mistake -- they 're coming for our guns. And we freedom-loving gun lovers are totally defenseless! Other than, you know, the guns’ -Stephen Colbert” (Kurtzman 1). There are as many people who advocate for pro gun laws as the people who are opposed, which is the reason why gun control has become one of the most controversial topics as of right now. America is truly split between those who advocate for gun control and those who are opposed.
However, that appears to be highly unlikely. Believing that the President of the United States would kill innocent elementary school students in order to gain support for more strict gun control seems absurd. This serves as an example of how American’s can not accept what is going on and there is chaos in our country. Society must always blame a more powerful source for tragic events. This particular event happened to fall on the shoulders of President Barack Obama.
In fact, according to Best, “maintaining a strong commitment to the prohibition of drugs may not have particularly positive instrumental effects”. Yet, “they affirm society’s commitment to sobriety and other moral principles” (Best 221). Similarly, with the War on Terror, people who appear to express criminal activity are prosecuted because policymakers adopt positions associated with values that support structure in the society (Best 221). Furthermore, some crimes may be considered more harmful than others because the values that the crimes break weigh heavier than other values. Overall the rhetoric associated with each “war” influences how many people, and even I, think about crimes
Should guns be illegal in the US? The most common debate is about guns being illegal in the US like in other countries, however not all agree. Guns are usually used to protect people, but in other cases, they are also used to scare them and even cause crimes. However, all these depend on the people.
Regarding the statement that whether citizens in United States should own guns, some people would say that arming themselves can prevent tragedy from occurring, while others assume that owning guns has been caused some problems and risks of violent events yearly. I tend to agree that guns for citizens should be reasonably banned in United States because of to reduce deaths from shootings and feasible solutions of gun-banning life. Guns in America has been already caused a large number of problems such as shooting and killing events. Guns are sometimes not considered as defending tools.
I think torture is such a serious subject that people would rather not acknowledge it .As it is such an inhumane subject the very discussion let alone act is enough to cause many to ignore the issue or even delegate it to someone below them with less power. As a result of this when it comes to the discussion of torture many not involved in government groups that conduct torture are totally opposed to the idea while those in the groups are usually split on the idea of whether or not torture should be used. As these two are on opposite sides of the spectrum they can rarely see eye to on the matter add that to the media constantly berating the use of torture and the media praising torture and you have a huge two sided debate on the subject of whether torture should be legal or
When the extremists try to harm the public or try to have advantages over other people who are not under them, it is known as extremism. In other words, extremism is individuals who have incredibly strong views on something that can threaten the safety or security of the world. The extremists have no mercy for those people because they believe that those who do not follow them are their enemies, and also God’s enemies. After I read some articles about religious and cultural extremism, I have been convinced by these three articles: anti-abortion extremism, Ku Klux Klan, and 9/11 (Al-Qaeda). Therefore, I believe that religious and cultural extremism is a global security threat.
This definition leads to the main issue people have when it comes to others playing violent video games, do they cause violence? My answer to this is no, and I have many reasons as to why they do not cause violence. First let’s look at who’s claiming violent video games are leading to violence. There are many people who claim violent video games leads to violence, and pretty much anyone can do this and provide reasons why they do, but what drives non-gamers into believing in this crap is due to popular organizations and people who claim that they do cause violence. NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre is a good example of these type of people.
Guns are a high trade item in the US, so there are definitely many other illegal sources. Also making strict gun laws takes power from the people. Owning and using guns is a constitutional right, and while some restrictions are reasonable, there are many that are not. Making too many, or unreasonable restrictions gives power to the government that should be the people 's. People should be better educated about firearms instead of creating harsher laws. An education
Gun laws give too much power to the government and way less from the people, which will lead to government corruption. And, stated by ClearPictureOnline.com,”Guns don 't kill people, people do. We need to concentrate on the values and morals of our citizens and at the role the media plays in glorifying violence and the lack of respect for law.” (Shootout: Do We Need More Gun Control Regulations?) What people don 't understand is that they are taking away their own freedoms with Gun Control.
A lot of people don’t care at all about laws, believing that these laws are getting in the way of their freedom and rights to live however they want, so they think that breaking rules is the right way to live. Frank Trippett in his passage “A Red Light for Scofflaws” states that the foundations of social order are going to be profoundly shaken if ordinary law-abiding citizens take to skirting the law, by first explaining that Americans are taking increasing liberties with all sorts of minor laws. He continues by stating that americans seem to think that law and order is for violent crimes only. The author’s purpose is to make people think about following the rules and orders, and to stop people from being scofflaws. The author establishes an
Police practicing public execution is a clear infringement upon the constitutional rights which is why I have chosen this article. The title of this article “police brutality may be overwhelmingly legal but it 's far from being ethical or just”. I have chosen this article not only with its connection to Dr. Martian Luther King Jr. but it is a growing epidemic in today 's society. While it is legal for an officer to use force to “protect and serve” the right to take ones life is not ethical.
This blog, is based on Evan Defilippis overview on the pros and cons of gun control. Defilippis develops well written and clear visual arguments on both sides of the issue. For example, he states “The main point of this argument is that criminals do not follow laws; therefore laws restricting gun ownership and types of guns would only hurt those who follow them.” “Gun control laws only help criminals, criminals do not play by the law. That is why we need to punish criminals, not law-abiding citizens by disarming them.