In Defense of Guns by James Q. Wilson
For our refutation, we discussed this author’s view on gun control. He brings up the idea that banning guns in the United States would be ineffective as there is no way of properly taking all the guns in America away from the people. he also states that if somebody is intent on killing they will find an illegal means of finding a gun. However, he also states that guns DO in fact raise the amount of homicides in America which supports our argument.
This article is not too useful within the debate of gun control because its argument is not strong enough. Stating that we should not control guns because it would be hard to take the guns away or stop illegal sales is no actual argument about trying or taking steps in the right direction. In truth these steps would help prevent gun issues and are thus better for the American people.
Dems Split on New Gun Control Push by Alexander Bolton
This is an article addressing the Democrat’s push for gun control following the mass shooting at the Navy Yard on September 16th, 2013. The article discusses how while the recent shooting should provide support to gun control backers, the issue still may not pull enough votes. This is due to the fact that Democrats will be facing a tough election in the 2014 elections and large groups, such as the National Rifle Association (NRA), will strongly oppose those who come out in favor of gun control.
Just as there was an issue with the previous article, the same problem presents itself in this article. This is that people are letting smaller and more insignificant issue get in the way of the real problem at hand, gun control. Legislatures are backing down from what is right for the American people in order to secure their electoral status and are allowing themselves to be bullied by large organizations such as the NRA. We must refocus on the issue at hand, the killing of innocent citizens, and not put politics before this.
In Gun Control Debate, Logic Goes Out the Window by Richard J. Davis
This article discusses how in many arguments against gun control, illogical points are accepted and nobody thinks twice about it. The author states that the focus of the gun control debate has gone out the window as common sense fixes to the system are ignored due to illogical reasoning . One supporting argument to this is the argument that people believe that a federal list of registered gun owners will lead to a government taking of guns followed by a dictatorship. This is just one of the illogical arguments used in the gun control debate.
This article supports the point that was brought up in the previous two articles. It states that illogical arguments should not hold us back from addressing the gun control issue as the serious issue that it is. the author even supports the idea I previously stated that because certain measures will not “solve” the issue immediately, that is no excuse for not enacting them at all in the first place. The issue of gun control deserves to be discussed in a logical manner so meaningful change can be made.
It is important to point out that firearms lead to countless accidental injuries and homicides. In a New York Times review of hundreds of child firearm deaths, they found that accidental shootings occurred roughly TWICE as often as the records indicate, because of idiosyncrasies in how such deaths are classified by the authorities (Luo and McIntire, 2013). When people are allowed to possess guns it ultimately leads to accidents. The exact number varies because many accidents due to firearms are classified as something other than an accidental shooting. These shootings are more frequent then people think and can leave a whole family distraught. Look at Joshua Skorczewski, he accidently shot his 12-year old sister when he lost control of a shotgun that was lying around the house. In 2011 alone, there were 847 unintentional nonfatal firearm injuries among children 14 and under (Luo and McIntire, 2013). Does it matter who is responsible? One way or another a young girl is dead.
Examines several historical and modern components of the use of guns in self-defense and other potential violent situations. As Richard North Patterson, an American novelist and active member of pro-peace and anti-violence groups, states, “”This lucid and penetrating study is essential reading for anyone who wishes to understand the tragedy of gun violence in America and-even more important-what we can do to stop it. David Hemenway cuts through the cant and rhetoric in a way that no fair-minded person can dismiss, and no sane society can afford to ignore” (Project Muse).
In 2006, author, Professor of Health Policy at the Harvard School of Public Health, and Director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center David Hemenway wrote a book entitled “Private Guns, Public Health” in which he breaks down various components involving the gun violence in America. The book provides a number of sources of research involving the effects of firearms on public health. While the book handles and affirms multiple reasons that benefit our argument, for now we will focus on the issue of self-defense for the sake of clarity and thoroughness.
“Guns should be put into our schools”. This is the idea supported by an op-ed article on CNN.com. To me this seems like an awful idea, with many different negative reproductions. The idea that this article supports is that if teachers are given guns to carry around the school, then it will thus create a safer environment for the students and will help prevent school shootings. This idea is not true however, as the issue is more complex than the article makes it out to be. Throwing more guns into the problem is an irrational decision that may even make the problem worse.
One issue with giving teachers guns to prevent problems is that now there are guns within the school to begin with. This makes the schools more dangerous then they usually are, only to help against an unlikely shooting. There would have to be measures in place to prevent students from getting their hands on the gun at all costs, and even at that accidents are bound to happen. Also, one would have to make sure that the teachers would be properly trained to handle a firearm before this solution could take place. This leads to several other questions that could result in even more problems within the school. For instance, how much training is enough training? How much training is needed so that in the event of an attack a teacher will execute their job without messing up and making the problem even worse or harming an innocent? Who would train these teachers and who would pay for it, especially in the case of a poorer school? This does not even count the questions that arise concerning which teacher would be selected to carry the gun around school and whether or not that teacher will handle the situation correctly during the event of a shooting. A teacher’s job should be the education of children, not taking out an armed shooter.
The problem with giving a teacher gun in a school is that it leads too many open questions that could make schools a less safe to be and may not even be effective in the case of a shooting. The argument addressed in this article simply tries to turn a blind eye on the real issue at hand, gun control. It attempts to solve a gun problem by throwing more guns at the situation. Only by eliminating the shooters in the first place can we make our schools a safer place for children to be.
My father is from Oklahoma, and used to hunt all the time with a rifle he bought when he was in high school. Hunting and owning guns was a part of Oklahoman culture, and my dad was just like all other men his age. But after he married my mom and after I was born, my father took his rifle, dismembered it and stored in different pieces all over the attic. He didn’t want the gun in the house, anywhere near me. Guns are in the homes of millions of Americans, and because of that, there are thousands of accidents a year. The US Center of Disease Control and Prevention conducted a study and found that ”more preschool age children were killed by firearms than police officers in the line of duty” (2007). The same study also found that there were 613 fatal accidents in 2007, 29 of which were children under the age of 9. There were “15,698 non-fatal firearm accidents” and “5,045 accidents that lead to hospitalization”. When the US Center of Disease Control and Prevention starts uncovering statistics like that in the United States, it really starts to worry me. The United States’ job is to discover when the people are in danger, and then help protect them. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention has done the first half of their job, now they need to do the second. The United States is unique in these statistics. An article by Erin Richardson and David Hemenway in the June 2010 edition of Journal of Trauma, Injury, Infection and Critical Care, found that “American children die by guns 11 times more likely as often as children in other high income countries”. 
to be addressed. The gun culture in America is too lenient, and kids are getting hurt because of it. The exact quote that will be of the most use to us is, “American children die by guns 11 times as often as children in other high income countries.” That statistic speaks for itself, Americans need to consider the value of a life, and if they really want to chance their child’s life.
COMM230 - Gun Ban 