These and some other court cases have largely contributed to today's understanding of individual possession and gun control, so being familiar with them is also necessary for building your expertise on gun control. Getting familiar with the historical background of the gun control discussion is only half of your research. You will also need to be aware of the present-day state of this ongoing discussion. To make it easier for you, we have taken the liberty and put together a selection of insightful pieces from both sides of the gun control discussion.
These pro gun control articles state that the current gun control regulations are not effective enough to confront gun violence and talk about how the situation can be improved:. Since everybody talks about gun control today, Amanda Marcotte of the Rolling Stone magazine has also come up with this surprisingly insightful piece. She does not claim to be an expert but rather speaks from the stand of one of the people at whom pro-gun arguments are supposed to aim, and explains why they don't work.
If you feel like you are not well-informed enough about gun control, this article is priceless for you. It briefly sums up the spirit of the Second Amendment as it was years ago and follows its evolution through the years, as well as the evolution of firearms themselves. This article is a detailed overview of the present-day gun control regulations in California, which is arguably the strictest in the land. They conclude by stating that the current regulations are not effective enough, as they involve a number of loopholes.
The authors suggest that the regulations should be made even stricter. Gun Control and the Constitution: Should We Amend the Second Amendment? Barrett points out that the language in the text of the Second Amendment is quite vague and leaves too much room for interpretation. So, instead of fixing or clarifying it, he suggests that a whole newest of regulations is necessary, clear and direct. Bovy takes a more radical stand in this discussion. She claims that we need to get rid of individual gun possession as a whole, with no exceptions.
In his time, Hamblin was fired for drafting a piece on gun control that was not approved by his superiors. In this article, he talks about how unhealthily politicized the topic is and how our society is incapable of seeing it as it is and not as an attack on our whole set of rights and freedoms. These anti gun control articles insist that the existing gun control regulations are ineffective because they are too strict and suggest that these regulations need to be loosened.
Here is what the experts from this side of the argument have to say:. DePhilippis and Hughes are convinced that the opinion that stricter gun regulations can end gun violence is wrong and that it is a myth that needs to be debunked. If you want to read more from them, feel free to check out their gun violence prevention site Armed With Reason. Davidson takes a scholarly approach on the issue. He attempts to give a definition of gun control and critically scrutinize the most common gun control approaches and methods.
This emotional piece is written by the widow of Chris Kyle whose tragic story was put on screen in American Sniper. If you want to know more about her take on gun control policy, you can read about it on her book American Wife: As a recognized author of books on crime and a respected teacher at Pepperdine University, Wilson uses his expertise to analyze what exactly pro gun control side has to offer.
He concludes that they are being too populist and have no concrete plan of action. Hunter works of Rand Paul, the conservative senator. The article focuses on stories where gun-owning individuals helped to confront crime and violence, as opposed to the stories where such individuals cause violence — that the pro gun control lobbyists like to manipulate. Hardy is a practicing attorney from Arizona. He blames pro gun control activists for being deaf to arguments from the anti gun control camp and incapable of a constructive dialogue.
According to him, they only see their position and will not rest until all individual firearm possession is banned for good. Being well-informed about the gun control debate is crucial for writing an excellent gun control essay, but it is still only half the battle. You still need to know what kind of essay you have to submit and what your teacher expects of you.
Here are the kinds of gun control essays that you may have to write:. Since gun control is an extremely debatable topic, it is most exciting to talk about which side of the debate is right. This is why, students most often have to write either argumentative or persuasive essays on gun control. If you have to write a persuasive essay, you know what you should do first — pick a topic that can inspire a debate between at least two opposing sides.
You also need a compelling argument that you will defend. Here, you also have nothing to worry about, because both sides of the gun control debate have numerous compelling arguments. As soon as the latter two elements are in place, it is the high time to start your research.
Putting it briefly, first, you get yourself familiar with the relevant historical background of the issue, and then you collect expert opinions. Notably, you should not limit yourself to the expert opinions from your side of the debate. You should also be aware of what your opponents have to say, so you know how to rebuke their claims in advance. As you know, a persuasive essay is the kind of essay where you have to convince a hypothetical opponent that your viewpoint on the subject is correct and theirs is not.
So, this is your ultimate goal when writing such an essay and you should use all means at hand to achieve it. By all means at hand we mean each of the three methods of persuasion:. Ultimately, you can use all three of these methods of persuasion in your gun control persuasive essay, but using all three is not necessary. You can even stick to just one, so long as you achieve your main goal — persuade your reader.
An argumentative essay on gun control is harder to write than a persuasive one because here you can only use logic to prove your point, i. Gun control is the kind of topic that inspires emotion, so it is hard to stick to logic and restrain from emotion.
Yet, the format of a gun control argumentative essay demands just that. This is the most noteworthy feature by which you differ a gun control argumentative essay from a persuasive one. The rest — the overall goal, the research, and the writing process — will be the same.
If you get particularly interested in the discussion around the gun control regulations, you are sure to dig up much more material than one may need for an essay. Truly, this topic is so deep and broad, and it can be investigated under so many angles and on so many levels, that you can write much bigger papers about it: In fact, you can devote your entire career to researching gun control. Of course, a research paper is bigger in volume than an average essay, but still, a single research paper is not nearly enough to cover all there is to cover about gun control.
So, if you set out to write a gun control research paper, the first thing for you to do is to narrow down your topic to make it more specific. Usually, students are allowed to re-formulate their research paper topics on the go, should they come up with something more interesting and original while conducting a research. Speaking of research, you are not limited to using printed sources by other authors.
In fact, chances are you will be encouraged to conduct an empirical research of your own for example, a survey and refer to it among other sources — which should count no less than five. The most important feature of a research paper is that it centers on the research data — facts, statistics, and analytics — and leaves out all speculations and opinions.
Save this discount code: Gun Control Essay Today, gun control has become one of those topics that everybody talks about. In this phrase, it means that the group will be in the frontline in making sure that it meets the goals and the interests of the citizen army. The main objective of the citizen army is to protect the best interests of the country, as well as, protecting the government also from foreign intervention. This means that when the gun control laws are being introduced, the main intention of introducing the second amendment is being assumed.
This means that the country would be left at the stake of only the military and the citizens would not have the power of protecting their government, as well as, the best interests of their nation Lott Another main reason why the second amendment was made was that the South would be able to control the slaves. Guns would be essential in helping carry out slavery in the South at ease.
Therefore, state militias served as slave patrols where they had to be given the mandate and responsibility to hold guns so that they would be able to control the slaves. The second amendment was also made because of the rebellions that used to take place in the country. For example, the whiskey rebellion caused the government to revoke the amendment as a way of controlling the militias in helping stop the rebellion.
The farmers were rebelling against the government for imposing a new tax, yet it had not been there previously. When the amendment was made, room for rebel had not been created against the government. However, such rebellions were experienced when the government was not in a position to meet certain needs of the people or it acted in such a way that people viewed as selfish or had corrupt intentions.
For this reason, the state has been enjoying its democratic right because rebellions and demonstrations are respected because the government realizes the power within the people. If such power had not been vested in the people, it would be difficult in the United States to stage rebellions and demonstrations in fight for human rights and freedom.
Imposing gun control laws in the country is, therefore, a way of curtailing freedom in the United States, as the people may lack the voice and the authority they had previously Bijlefeld There has also been an argument that it is not the guns that kill people, but it is the people themselves who kill other people.
In this context, those against the gun controls argue that it is a personal initiative for a criminal to engage in crime, whether he holds a gun or not. In this regard, he does not have to possess gun for him to hold a gun. More comparisons are made between other weapons that are used to kill people and the guns that are always blamed for being used in killing people. People use crude weapons including screwdrivers, knives, swords or any metallic objects if they have the intention to kill other people.
The gun just necessitates and quickens the process, and they argue that the killing would still have taken place, in the absence of the gun. Therefore, before placing the gun control laws as a measure to reduce violence and crime, more research should be indulged and there should be other actions that ought to be taken as a way of reducing the violence.
For example, most people who commit these crimes are usually in the influence of high drug intoxication. It is these drugs that will make them use the guns or other weapons around them in committing violence.
The best way to help reduce violence in such a person would not be confiscating the gun he is carrying, but rehabilitating him as a way to reduce the drug use in him. This is because even after taking the gun, the drug effects may show him to use other weapons to commit the crime. However, when he has been led out of using the drugs, he will not use the gun wrongly, and will continue keeping and bearing it for the right purpose, which is self- defense and protecting the interests of the nation, as outlined in the constitution Dixon, Ideally, the legislations that have been created for gun control are meant for the criminals.
It goes without saying that criminals do not follow the law, and making such legislation does not stop them from committing their crimes. Criminals are very conversant with the laws and they intentionally break them so that they get what they want.
The new laws that have been created for gun control are, therefore, going to affect the citizens who are not criminals and are held illegible to carry the guns. This would be unfair to them because the criminals will always have their own ways to hide and use the guns even when the new laws are being put into practice. With this in mind, the rate of crime and violence is likely to shoot up since it is in the knowledge of the criminals that people are not holding guns, and they can, therefore, use their guns more freely than they would have used them when people are holding guns Spitzer It has also been concluded that gun laws do not work in any way.
This is in reference of earlier legislations that had been placed in hopes that they would be able to regulate gun violence.
For instance, there was a law that existed between and The law required that no one was allowed to carry guns, but it did not work as gun violence did not reduce, as expected. This shows that there is little or no correlation between gun violence and the enactment of the ban on firearm holding in the U.
The legislation itself had loopholes, which the criminals used in keeping and using the guns wrongly. Other factors that may have a higher degree of correlation with gun violence are factors such as having mental illness and using drugs wrongly. When the government concentrates on confiscating guns on a measure to reduce gun violence, it will lose the track and violence will still be on the rise.
It should focus on other solutions, and gun control should come last when other measures are working.
SWK Introduction to Social work Professor Rubin Gun Control Gun control is a term that describes the use of law to limit people's access to handguns, shotguns, rifles, and other firearms, through passing statutes that require, for example, gun purchasers to undergo background checks for criminal records, for guns to be registered, or a.
Gun Control Introduction. According to the Second Amendment in the Constitution, the citizens have the right to possess and bear arms. But, this has remained an important issue since decades.
Gun Control Essay Examples. total results. A Debate Over the Issue of Gun control in Canada. 1, words. words. 1 page. An Introduction to the Creative Essay on the Topic of Guns. 1, words. 4 pages. Gun Control Holds Some Fundamental Things to Hold True. words. 1 page. Should an Ordinary Citizen Consider Gun Ownership for. Gun Control Notes Essay and the safety of others By Jonathan Masters, online writer/editor for the Council on Foreign Relations Introduction The debate over gun control in the United States has waxed and waned over the years.
Narrative gun control essay. In a narrative essay, you tell a story about an experience – yours or someone else’s, real-life or fictional. You can tell a story about guns and what happened because of certain gun control regulations or what could have happened if they were different. A narrative essay will be about your (or someone else's) experience related to gun control. Process gun control essay. A process essay talks about how to solve a particular issue. In our case, it can be about how to put an end to gun violence through gun control regulations, for example. The introduction is where you present your topic.