Annotated Bibliography for "Understanding Gun Control"

Diamond, Jeremy. "Poll: More Americans Oppose Stricter Gun Control" CNN. 21
October 2015. Web. 20 April 2016
Simply gives a brief rundown on gun control statistics and where certain people fall on
the matter.
Given that this source is CNN, it's a pretty reputable source and it remains neutral, just
providing stats.
Ingraham, Christopher. "There Are Now More Guns than People in the United
States." Washington Post. Web. 20 April 2016.
Offers some numbers regarding guns in America. Shows the growth in recent years and
current approximation.
Christopher Ingraham has written multiple articles on the issue and being published by
the Washington Post helps credibility. The article remained pretty neutral, pulling slightly
to the pro gun side.
Leghorn, Nick. "Debunking " A Dummy's Guide to Winning Gun Control Debates"
- The Truth About Guns." The Truth About Guns. 12 June 2013. Web. 20 April 2016
Nick's article argues the main points of the gun control debate for the side of those who
want no change. The article responds directly to each of the common points and talks
about Honduras. Honduras implemented heavier gun restrictions and currently has one
of the highest rates of murder in the world. He states that gun control laws would be
unjust and ineffective in that we don't outlaw something because of what a person might
do with it but only if it is inherently evil. To the issue of the 2nd Amendment he replies
that regardless of differences in the times guns could still be effective as it was intended.
I feel that Nick makes equally valid points in his article but as with Julian, he leans on
opinion more than hard, disprovable facts and shapes the facts to his end. His opposition
will automatically discredit him because he is writing for a pro gun publication and it
doesn't help that he chose an image of Foghorn Leghorn packing a pistol.
Miniter, Frank. "How To Win a Debate With An Anti-Gunner." America's 1st
Freedom. 15 April 2015. 20 April 2016
Yet another guide on winning this debate. Frank writes with conviction and intelligence,
arguing multiple valid points. A good portion of his article circles around a debate that he
had with professor on the topic of gun control.

Would be written off by his opposition because he writes for a website backed by the
NRA. While many of the points made are valid, it is still the same argument on a
different level, regardless of how well worded it is.
"Statement on President Obama's Proposed Executive Actions on Gun Control."
NRA-ILA. 5 January 2016. Web. 20 April 2016
A short article from the NRA sponsored, politic based website. The article is critical of
the president and accuses him of engaging in "political rhetoric" and ignoring other
options for real solutions to real problems. The article takes a strong stance on "not
allowing" perceived harassment and abuse. No author cited
Given the association with the NRA, this would quickly be passed over by their
opposition, especially with no author taking credit. While the article is quick to lay
blame, they fail to see that they are engaging in the very acts that they are accusing the
president of.
Nekola, Adam. "Gun Rights vs. Gun Control." Pew Research Center for the People
and the Press RSS. 13 August 2015. Web. 20 April 2016
Not an article but research charts published by Pew. These charts show the difference in
support of gun restrictions based on many factors such as age, gender, location, education
and ethnicity.
Given the neutrality and no opinion given, there is little for any side to argue. Given that
it comes from Pew lends to it's credibility. One of the most surprising graphs was the one
the showed the relation to education. College graduates have the highest support for gun
laws followed by high school or lower floating around an even 50% split. Some college
however, was the biggest advocating group for gun rights.
"Gun Rights." Opensecrets RSS.
<https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=Q13> 22 January 2016
Web. 20 April 2016.
Another research publication, this one published by opensecrets.org. It shows the dollar
amounts spent by different groups on gun lobbying, in effort to maintain the status quo.
Same as the previous, no opinion and just numbers. This source's main function is to
track money spent by lobbyists in America and is nonprofit and unaffiliated.
Popken, Ben. "How Big Is America's Gun Business?" NBC News. 3 December 2015.
Web. 20 April 2016
Written in response to the San Bernardino shooting, this article sticks to the numbers
involving the gun industry. It would seem that given the reference to the shooting, it
would be slanted towards gun control.

NBC is a reputable source and in this instance, remains neutral to the issue. It shows
interesting information about the industry and other related information such as
saturation, trade related employment and reasoning for gun ownership.
Rickett, Oscar and Klingler, John. "Explaining America's Love of Guns to British
People" VICE. 19 April 2013. Web. 20 April 2016
This article gives a humorous description of the gun situation in America to a British
citizen. It focuses on how the debate is somewhat futile and that America's love of guns is
a societal issue and deep seeded. It makes many good points regarding the accepted
"norm" that we have here.
This article deals with little tangible proof but more on "common sense" and things that
most people already know. While the article dispenses the information with humor, the
points that it makes are no less valid. Pro gun individuals would discredit the article
because of the lack of evidence and the humorous approach.
Sarafian, Julian. "A Dummy's Guide to Winning Gun Control Debates" The Daily
Californian. 10 June 2013. Web. 20 April 2016
Julian argues the main points of the gun control debate for the side of reform. He points
out that other countries have successfully implemented gun control laws (Australia),
stating new laws would be to punish and deter criminals. He also addresses the difference
in situations now and when the 2nd Amendment was put in place and other retorts to
common points.
I feel that Julian makes many good points in the debate but has some shortcomings in his
argument because they aren't based in solid and undeniable fact but opinion based. While
the majority of his argument is valid, his opposition would likely discredit and disregard
him because he is writing for a California based publication. They will view him as a
typical "California liberal" and move on. I also feel that the title he gives his article is too
standoffish to change anyone's opinion. He basically offends any pro gun citizen by using
the word "dummy".
"Obama: "AK-47s Belong in the Hands of Soldiers, Not in the Hands of Criminals'"
msnbc.com 6 September 2013. Web 20 April 2016
This article is simply referencing statements made by President Obama shortly after the
shooting in Aurora, CO. It is citing what was an emotional statement made by the
president in the wake of one our country's most violent, local happenings in recent years.
MSNBC is a reputable source and in this instance, is neutral on the issue, simply
reporting the President's statements.