Over the course of history humans always been in war and somehow found a way to kill one another. Weapons have become more and more deadly to the point where we have weapons that can kill less than a second. These weapons are called guns and they have been one of the most controversial subjects in history. Many people think their should be a ban on guns and their are those that think otherwise. Molly Ivins, the woman who wrote “Get a Knife, Get a Dog, but Get Rid of Guns” supports knifes over guns and says that guns only kill but, her essay is put together poorly because of constant use of verbal fallacies such as hasty generalization, oversimplification, and even either-or fallacy. Right away Ivins starts off by saying that she is not “anti gun, but she is pro knife”. From the first sentence she claims she is “anti gun” but as you read the essay you start to see that almost all of the argument her saying that guns are horrible and they should be banned. She then brings up the second amendment saying that it says that guns are the right to a well regulated militia and not everybody else; but I don't think she understood it clearly because the second amendment then says the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Ivins then begins to use verbal fallacies; …show more content…
She says that family arguments can end in someone being killed if their was a gun, but she doesn't understand that the same thing would happen if their was a knife too. She never looks at more than one side and doesn't go over any reasons why their would be guns and argue against those views. Ivins even tries to bring up England saying that England is doing better with gun control laws; she doesn't bring up any facts and she has no logical explanation or reasoning why England is doing
She talks about all the important reasons why we need gun control and why it is an issue as well. One eye-popping statistic is that a majority of the worst acts of violence dealing with a gun are by people who have never actually violated the law in America before. People say that such violent gun acts are by criminals anyway. So putting a ban on all guns from law bidding citizens would have no real effect. However, it would be good if they showed a statistical chart on all the people who committed violent guns acts and break it down to if they were criminals before or if it was their first offense.
Zakaria’s entire argument rest on the idea that “easy access to guns” are somehow more important than any other thing going on. Furthermore, by asserting that gun violence can stop, with more attention Zakaria forgets that that’s how gun violence
Even though there are many people argue “the guns do not kill people but people do”. However, Evan DeFilippis states, in his article “Debunking the Guns Don’t Kill People, People Kill People Myth”, that the gun itself is not able to harm, and guns become harmful when people hold them. He highlights that when people hold a gun, they tend to kill more often and more efficiency than those who do not have a gun. He illustrates this is because the environment may affect people’s behaviors. If the surrounding environment is that everyone has a gun, people become more fractious and they may not able to control themselves under extreme emotions.
Ivins compares the danger level of automobiles to guns. “...another lethal object that is regularly used to wreck great carnage” (line 8). “Obviously, this society is full of people who haven 't had enough common sense to use an automobile properly. But we haven 't outlawed cars” (line 9). She acknowledges a common rebuttal against gun laws, but then immediately argues against that.
For others, a view that has arose later, guns are the “perpetuation of illicit social hierarchies, the elevation of force over reason,” and a promoter of collectivity and remover of individuality. This latter view of guns is a direct application of the conflict theory. For those who hold this view, and likely support the passage of gun control laws, guns are representative of social inequality that is abundant in modern society, that the usage of guns is a means of violently coercing those of lower classes to remain in their class. The view of guns as a symbol of protection is also an application of the conflict theory.
What’s missing from the typical kindergartener’s backpack? A gun. The ultimate solution to gun violence is more guns, isn’t that obvious? We are in need of guns everywhere to the point where our nation needs armed guards in every school. They say the more guns we have, the more gun violence there is, but in fact it does the complete opposite and solves gun violence.
Guns don’t kill people. People kill people. Many believe this, but columnist Nicholas Kristof, author of “Our Blind Spot about Guns,” published in 2014 in the New York Times, disagrees. A rhetorical analysis should consist of: logos, pathos, and ethos. Kristof’s use of logos is strong due to the amount of facts and statistics he offers to his audience, but he fails to strongly use pathos and ethos, due to the lack of these elements Kristof’s argument is weakened.
Gun Control Debate Jake Novak, in an article for CNBC titled, “Gun control isn’t the answer. We already know how to stop the violence,” gives his opinion regarding the controversial issue of gun control. Novak argues that gun control is not the answer to rising gun violence but that proper enforcement of the law would go a long way in reducing the cases of gun violence in America. He states, “We actually solved the issue of rising gun violence in America in the mid-1990’s and again in the early 2000’s by doing something radical. We enforced the law” (Novak 28).
A weapon in the wrongs hands is the maximum danger humanity can face. Nowadays, violence and delinquency in society are viewed as the maximum problem solver. Humanity is full of chaos; hate and envy seize our souls. Guns are the ultimate security for some citizens but for others, these add to a feeling of defenselessness. Throughout history, any topic related to guns means a plethora of problems.
In today’s society, one of the most alienating issues in American politics is gun control. More specifically, the issue is whether or not guns should be banned in the United States. Some people would say that guns should be banned because it would reduce crime as a whole and keep citizens safer. These people, enthusiasts of stricter gun laws, fear being safe in their country where there are so many people who have access to guns. Opponents of this argument, however, also fear losing safety.
The use of and the owning of guns is a very hot and debated topic in society today. For many, this is a life and death debate due to the recent and numerous school shootings. These school shootings have caused an outcry for more gun control, specifically in relation to the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting. Despite these calls, increased gun control is not the answer. Most gun owners’ use their guns responsibly and for good purposes.
How to reduce gun violence " In the 1960's, there was one school shooting. In the 1980's, there were 27. In the 1990's, there were 58. In the past decade, there have been over 120" (Hoehn).
Guns are just a tool, like knives and hammers and it completely depends on the people on how they use it. People who support guns and arms say that the Second Amendment secures individual’s right to carry guns with them and that gun rights is needed for self-protection, and was intended for military to have peace and defend the country if needed (Spitzer, 70). Most of the Americans use guns as a source to protect themselves and they believe that gun ownership prevents crime. A study conducted on November 26, 2013 showed that bans on weapons did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level (Lane, 5). Moreover, even if the rules and regulations are executed on gun control, not all criminals obey the law.
Gun Control Lately people have been using guns in a negative way and causing a bad effect on the world. People have been using guns inapropriatly and have been performing mass killings. If guns are being used by people then the people using them should know how to use them correctly, or not being a crazy lunatic. When I was 12 I was playing with a pistol and accidentally shot it, I wasn’t hurt and no one else was hurt but somebody could have been injured badly. Gun laws are the cause to a lot of the violent crimes in the united states and laws need to be changed so people can’t purchase guns as easily that way we aren’t in as much trouble.
The number of incidents of gun violence last year in the United States was about 60,000. In recent years, the number of mass shooting has risen to about one mass shooting per day in the United States. The country is divided with some wanting to reevaluate our gun control laws and either ban or add additional regulations to the purchase of guns. Others say it is our right for Americans to own guns and something the founding fathers considered important to put in the Bill of Rights. The number of firearm sales has risen with the number of mass shooting many Americans question if banning guns or certain guns could help decrease the number of gun violence deaths.