Will Misenheimer

Deby Jizi
UWRT 1102-028
23 March 2016

Double Entry Journal

Citation:
Gun Control versus Gun Rights. Laws.com. n.d. Web. 23 March 2016.
<http://gun.laws.com/gun-rights/gun-control-versus-gun-rights.>

Source: Quote (Page# or Paragraph #)

Responses

Intro: it goes beyond just the mere notion of

"I like guns vs. guns are dangerous."

I totally agree. There is a much more political

beef here. Both sides have valid points,
therefore, it is very important that teach side
listen to what the other has to say.

Paragraph 1In a society with hundreds of

cultures, differences and arguments can
arise out of nothing. Words are one thing but
the use of firearms is an entirely different
topic. With less restrictive laws on
purchasing and ownership a seemingly
pointless feud could intensify into murder.
Guns give a man power, with power
inevitably comes abuse.

This is the truth. I do feel that, as this country

becomes more diversified, it becomes much
harder for others to understand each other
because of each individuals origins and
customs. Lighter gun restrictions would
certainly spell out destruction, in my opinion.
There is a reason that criminals are restricted
or banned from purchasing firearms. A good
avenue of research would be the current gun
laws. The quote, Guns give a man power,
with power inevitably comes abuse is very
true.

Paragraph 2The United States leads the

world in gun violence and ownership. The
American Journal for Public Health
conducted a study-Of the 233,251 people
who were homicide victims in the United
States between 1988 and 1997, 68% were

These are very powerful arguments that may

be made for more restrictive gun laws. The
figure that shows that out of the 30,000+
people killed from gun violence, only 234
were considered to be justifiable is very, very
powerful. This means that roughly 76 out of

killed with guns, of which the large majority

10,000 gun-related homicides were justifiable.
were handguns. In 2005, 30,694 people in
That is a very low number.
the United States died from firearm-related
deaths In comparison, 33,651 Americans
were killed in the Korean War and 58,193
Americans were killed in the Vietnam War.
Out of the 30,000+ people killed from gun
violence, only 234 were considered to be
justifiable. In addition to homicides and
suicides more than 1,500 people perish from
gun related accidents per year.
Paragraph 3Currently an estimated
38.4% of American households have guns.
As of 2005 there were an estimated 290
million guns in circulation-40% which were
handguns. In addition to this number, 3-5
million guns change hands in the secondary
markets through illegal transactions. The
market is flooded with guns and it is for the
most part unregulated. This combination
makes convicts and ill-equipped people
prone to obtaining such weapons.

This figure represents the large amount of

arms that exist in the United States. In my
opinion, the most valid point of this argument
is that 3-5 million guns change hands in the
secondary markets through illegal
transactions because it becomes a real
problem when people who are not allowed to
receive guns get their hands on firearms.

Paragraph 4An often forgot about

argument in the gun control debate. The first
reaction is that guns take lives, but they also
create negative externalities. According to
the Brady Campaign-"A study of all direct
and indirect costs of gun violence including
medical, lost wages, and security costs
estimates that gun violence costs the nation
$100 billion a year. The average total cost of
one gun crime can be as high as $1.79
million, including medical treatment and the
prosecution and imprisonment of the
shooter" This money doesn't come out of
thin air, it is paid for by the taxpayers.

This is another valid point. The damage that

guns can do is very detrimental and may cost
a party a lump-sum of money. This is why it is
very important that guns do not end up in the
wrong hands. This is a responsibility that lies
in the hands of the gun owners, to not partake
in illegal transactions and to elect to do the
responsible thing.

Paragraph 5The intended purpose of the

second amendment is to empower U.S.
civilians against governmental tyranny-the
only controversy revolves around whether
that power is for an individual or collective

On the other hand there are very, very valid

arguments from the pro-gun rights side. This
is the most powerful argument as of now.
Guns are ensured to The People under the
2nd Amendment and this is the knockout

purpose. The second amendment to bear

arms is a basic civil right given to all
Americans and restricting such rights is
unconstitutional.

punch. Arguably, this right was granted to

give power to the people in defense of a
possible tyrannical government. In my
opinion, a tyrannical government and the
attempt to take the arms of the citizens are
the 2 things that could spark a revolution.

Paragraph 6The second amendment

permits US citizen's private ownership and
use of guns to protect themselves and their
property from attacks. Gun-ownership
activists believed that individual ownership
of handguns will control gun violence and
homicides in America. If ordinary citizens
are unarmed they become more susceptible
to attacks because of their unarmed status.
Guns also protect those who are at risk and
can't protect themselves. A wife in an
abusive relationship is a common example.
Although statistics are difficult to gauge and
formulate, many gun activists believe that
for every life taken by a gun, 65 are saved.

This is another powerful argument dealt by

the pro-gun rights side. People need a
backbone, a second line of defense. Take the
wife in an abusive relationship, for example.
In this situation, the wife needs to have a
means of protecting herself against her
abusive husband. I would love to know more
about how the last statistic in this paragraph
was generated.

Paragraph 7States with strict gun laws on

average have higher violent crime rates than
"shall issue" states. Some of the most
dangerous places in the United States are
leaders in gun control reform-examples
include areas of Washington DC and New
Jersey. The issue of violence is not about
gun control, but instead about, poverty and
crumbling urban environments.
Excluding inner-city violence, homicide rates
in America have been steadily declining and
are now at lower levels than Great Britainwho have extremely tight gun laws.
Excluding ordinary citizens from the use of
firearms is inefficient-those who commit
violence will find a way to get a firearm, by
whatever means necessary.

This is very interesting. Just as stated above,

guns give power to the one who has the gun.
Therefore, those who want power acquire
guns. It is very understandable that those in
poverty-ridden areas and situations would
want things. The way to make that happen?
Firearms, because firearms=power and
power can help you get what you want.

Paragraph 8A large issue of the gun

While hunting for survival is very rare

control debate revolves around the second

amendment and the right to use guns for
hunting, target practicing, or sport.
America's settlers hunted for survival, now
in modern times, the sport is wildly popular.
Restricting or regulating purchases of
hunting tools or shooting equipment is
unjust.

nowadays, I believe that the fact that

Americas settlers engaged in hunting for
survival is the reason that hunting and
shooting for sport will not be outlawed today.
Thomas Jefferson once referred to shooting
as a, reliever. Many hunters also use
shooting ranges to sight in their guns to
improve their efficiency during the hunt, which
is why hunting and shooting ranges tend to
go hand in hand.