...perspectives include: “I’m right you’re wrong”, “You’re right I’m wrong”, “both right both wrong”, “this issue isn’t important”, and “the truth is in all perspectives” (Alder & Proctor, p. 104). The purpose of the pillow method is for each person to gain insight from each step in the process. By looking at the problem from multiple perspectives each person gets the chance to enhance their cognitive complexity (Alder & Proctor, p. 104). In this paper I will apply the pillow method to a disagreement a coworker and I had over the new gun control laws that are being proposed by our government. While my co-worker believes that the government is trying to take away our rights by proposing new gun laws, I however believe that there should be changes made to the current laws put in place. I believe applying the pillow method to any argument will result in either a resolution or a better understanding between the two parties involved. “I’m right you’re wrong”: This step involves me stating the reasons why I believe that I am right and explaining my point of view on the subject (Alder & Proctor, p. 104). There are several reasons that I believe that there should be new gun laws put in place. One of the main reasons I feel so strongly about this issue is because the U.S. has the highest rate of gun related deaths than any developed country. From 2006 to 2010 there were 47,856 gun-related murders in the U.S. (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u...
Words: 1342 - Pages: 6
...Rhetorical English 102 Michel Mhor September 7 2017 Is gun control being handled right? Will taking guns away help with gun violence, or will it keep happening? Adam Gopnik, wrote the article “The simple truth about gun control” because of the massacred in Sandy Hook, in which he wants those who don’t know how gun control is being handled and in what ways will it help stop those who have a killed innocent children. He gives examples in how taking guns away and having more control over it reduces crime. The actions that are being taken, but also talks about those who would rather own a gun and wouldn't want to do anything about it simply because they don't want their freedom taken away. Or because they just don’t know what to really do about it. Gopnik made his thesis on the reality of gun control by making it his title....
Words: 601 - Pages: 3
...around thirty people will be killed with a gun, not including suicides. Many more will be wounded. I can safely predict this number because that is the average number of homicides committed with a gun in the US each day. Such killings have become so routine that they are barely noticed even in the local news. Only when a significant number of people are murdered, particularly when they include children or are killed randomly, is the event considered newsworthy. Yet efforts to regulate the possession of guns in the US are consistently defeated. The case for gun rights rests primarily on two claims, one about facts, the other about moral principle. The claim about fact is that members of society as a whole are safer when more of them have guns, since potential aggressors are likelier to be deterred the more reasonable it is for them to believe that their potential victim is armed. The claim about principle is that each person has a right of self-defense and that this right entails a further right not to be deprived of, or prevented from having, the most effective means of self-defense. These claims are independent. Most of those who assert them think the second would be true even if the first were false. Advocates of gun rights usually defend the claim about fact by appealing to statistics for example, those that suggest that when a city bans handguns, rates of violent crime and homicide increase rather than decrease. The claim about principle is often defended by appeal to...
Words: 1714 - Pages: 7
...Constitution states, “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” This amendment has become a controversial topic in the U.S. Many people support this amendment, arguing that it allows people to protect themselves. However, others disagree with this claim because guns are a safety issue themselves. I challenge the second amendment because presented by allowing guns outweigh the potential safety they provide. The founders of America created the second amendment to protect colonists in a time of war. These people had no other choices than to fight or be enslaved under the monarchy of Britain. Their situation encouraged the creation of the right to bear...
Words: 752 - Pages: 4
...Anonymous Professor Writing 201 6 August 2015 Gun Control It Now “Here’s your gun sir, with a side of no strings attached. Enjoy!” Throughout history, weapons , such as guns , were designed to protect and kill. Whether it was an issue over love, property, or even war, weapons were a necessary means if there was a disagreement. However, times have changed and guns have become dangerous and deadly weapons often used for no purpose at all, other than to harm innocent individuals. Although there are gun restrictions in California; an individual must complete a safety and handling course, be a legal citizen of the United States, and pass a thorough background check; including a fingerprint check. On occasion, it is still possible to obtain an illegal weapon through the black market; therefore, it is easy to buy an unregistered and untraceable gun, which can lead to detrimental effects. The Constitution is the foundation for laws and social norms for the United States. In the second amendment, it states: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Nevertheless, the Constitution can be interpreted in many different ways. Although the Constitution permits the “right to bear Arms” a certain level of control is necessary in order to keep peace and stray away from anarchy and chaos. Unfortunately, it has become very easy for people to obtain weapons of mass destruction and preventative...
Words: 1307 - Pages: 6
...Gun Control or Our Freedom Jill Sanders ENG/215 January 28, 2013 Sophia Hsia Gun Control or Our Freedom The pros and cons of gun control has been a debate over the years brings several issues to light. The myth of the Second Amendment is merely a reasoning clause for the right to bear arms, and people have the right to bear arms for their own personal use. The truth of the Second Amendment is “A well- regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state ” (www.guninformation.org/freedom.html). The legislative proposals are trying to restrict the availability of firearms to the public raise several questions. What restrictions on firearms are truly permissible under our Constitution? Does gun control constitute crime? Will the nation’s crime rates decrease with stricter regulation put on gun ownership? Last but not least would it hinder or impair the means of self-defense of citizens? (Krouse, March 2005) “First it is important to realize that the right to live is a very important right and a freedom”. If more gun control means lives saved then more gun control should mean more freedom. “The government has an obligation to protect the people’s rights such as the right to live. So the government has an obligation to place more restrictions on individual gun ownership. Do you as an American agree to the government is infringing on your rights?” We are going to explore the choices we have as citizens of the United States (www.guninformation.org/freedom...
Words: 1697 - Pages: 7
...resort to extreme measures; simply watch your chance and hit him with a brick. That will be sufficient. If you shall find that he had not intended any offense, come out frankly and confess yourself in the wrong when you struck him; acknowledge it like a man and say you didn’t mean to. Yes, always avoid violence; in this age of charity and kindliness, the time has gone by for such things. Leave dynamite to the low and unrefined. Go to bed early, get up early--this is wise. Some authorities say get up with the sun; some say get up with one thing, others with another. But a lark is really the best thing to get up with. It gives you a splendid reputation with everybody to know that you get up with the lark; and if you get the right kind of lark, and work at him right, you can easily train him to get up at half past nine, every time--it’s no...
Words: 1790 - Pages: 8
...As I sat down to do some research on gun violence, I was searching the Fox News website for information on shootings and suddenly “Breaking News” popped up on my screen, that read “Active shooter at Ohio University”. It seems like mass shootings are becoming more common these days. I can't help but wonder what we can do about it. It turns out that the “shooter” actually used a car and knife to attack people, not a gun like the media stated at first. And do you know what stopped the attacker from killing innocent people? A gun. Guns aren’t the problem, mental health issues and the strict guns laws are a huge part of the problem. Guns can be a tool for safety and if more good guys had guns, we wouldn't have as many mass shootings, banning...
Words: 2153 - Pages: 9
...Gun control The U.S. should not have gun control laws. The Second Amendment to the Constitution states that, “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” This amendment has been around since 1791, and there has been gun control almost as long as it's been around. The National Rifle Association is an advocate of the Second Amendment and an opponent of those who propose restrictions on guns. Even Presidents Reagan and Bush are members, and Nixon, Eisenhower, and Kennedy were also members. Why do people feel the need to own a handgun? One reason is heritage. For as long as this country has been around, there have been gun owners, to defend themselves and to hunt for food. Buying, owning, or carrying a handgun doesn't hurt anyone. Until a person commits a crime, he/she is free to choose what he/she wants to do. Even if guns were completely banned from the U.S.A., people would still find a way to get them. Criminals would get guns. They would have their way, and there would be nothing we could do about it. We would have no way to defend ourselves. What is gun control to you? To me, it is the unconstitutional regulation and banning of guns to try to keep the crime ...
Words: 394 - Pages: 2
...Guns or No Guns Three hundred and twenty-three students have died in documented school shootings over the past 15 years, making it the by far the largest cause of violent deaths in school. A very highly debated topic corresponding with this issue is how to stop it, any many people believe that arming teachers is the way to do it. Many also believe that arming teachers will only make things worse, and that’s what Allen Rostron tries to get across, to parents of teens, in his article Arming Teachers Will Not Reduce School Violence, published in 2012. In this article, Rostron uses many appeals, along with his reputation to provide the reader with statistics to back up his reasoning and to show his knowledge on the topic to persuade readers that arming teachers is a bad idea in the fight against school violence. Though Rostron uses many appeals throughout his writing to persuade us to his side of view, his reputation precedes him. He is a Professor of Law at the University of Missouri Kansas City and has published multiple articles on gun policy and whether or not guns should be used and how they should be used. To name a few, "Cease Fire: A 'Win-Win' Strategy on Gun Policy for the Obama Administration," Harvard Law & Policy Review, Oct. 28, 2009, "Dodging the Bullet: Tort Immunity for Gun Makers," Jurist, Nov. 3, 2005, and "The Supreme Court, the Gun Industry, and the Misguided Revival of Strict Territorial Limits on the Reach of State Law," Michigan State Law Review, Spring...
Words: 1487 - Pages: 6
...Gun Control Gun control is one of the controversial issues in the United States of America, especially after the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King. In some parts of America living with a gun is not only a right but also a culture. But for many others it is a threat and a source of insecurity. I am part of the latter and hope to see gun free America. In real world there ups and downs, there are moments of pleasure as well as discomfort. This is fact of life. Crimes are committed not only by criminals but by anyone who couldn’t restrain his anger during interaction in day to day life. At this moment it is not the same to be with a gun and without. As a human being there are moments when things are beyond our control and forced us to take serious measures against others. During this moment if a person is unable to restrain his emotion, carrying a gun will push him to commit a crime which he has never been intended. Bearing gun is a right as it is written in the Second Amendment of United States constitution; however, how this can be reconciled if it is a threat to the majority of Americans is a legitimate question. Guns exact a huge toll on America's children and youth, both in terms of lives lost and in terms of quality of life. Study shows that for black families, the chance of their male children dying from a gunshot wound is 62% higher than the chance of dying in a motor vehicle crash. For Hispanics, the chance of dying by...
Words: 774 - Pages: 4
...Gun Control in America Alicia Buford COMM 215 Instructor Bruce Massis May 20, 2013 Did you know that in the United States that there are almost as many firearms as there are citizens (Wadman, 2013)? Consequently, the second amendment of the constitution gives each American citizen “The Right to Bear Arms.” The right to bear these arms is a just that, a right but, along with that right comes responsibility. Since the days of the pioneers, firearms have been an element of the American tradition as defense and a means of hunting or activity. However, as we progress through the 21st century the use of guns has changed significantly. Some of the reasons for the change are the steady increase in crime and the battle for the right to have possession of hand guns. Due to the number of gun owners in America, one might think that we have a strong affection for guns and gun ownership rights. This could not be further from the truth. Americans views towards guns have shifted significantly. In a 1998 Harris Poll taken a year before Columbine, shows that almost 70 percent of Americans favor “stricter gun control” (Contexts, Fall, 2003). So what should we do about this? I believe that stricter gun control legislation should be the solution to much of the gun violence that is plaguing our nation. Restricting the right to bear arms, especially assault weapons should make our communities safer. Granted, many people in community all across this country own guns. A large...
Words: 1039 - Pages: 5
...Gun control laws are robust laws around purchasing, selling, carrying, and even utilizing a gun. Knowing these laws is extremely imperative for individuals who intend to possess a firearm or have a gun in their household. With the things are in the world these days some people believe the gun laws need to be revised and become more stringent. To be completely forthright, despite the fact that I possess a gun, this paper is not to support or conflict with gun laws, but rather to advise myself more about them and perceive how I feel about them as well, so I know our rights with having firearms in our household. There are numerous gun laws from the federal government; however, there are just as many more laws from each state government. Annotated Bibliography Sources (Gun Law History in The United States and Second Amendment Rights): SPITZER, R. J. (2017). Gun Law History in The United States and Second Amendment Rights. Law & Contemporary Problems, 80(2), 55-83. This article provides information about the historical backdrop of the gun laws, about laws getting to be stricter, and areas they ought to have become more stringent. The commentary stated, “This historical examination is particularly...
Words: 899 - Pages: 4
...Why Gun Free Zones Are Not Safe Since the year 2007, there has been over three major public shootings in the United States. On April 16, 2007 Cho-Seung-Hui shot and killed over thirty two students and faculty members at Virginia Tech College. On December 14, 2012 Adam Lanza shot and killed twenty students and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary school. On January 18, 2013 James Holmes shot and killed twelve people an injured fifty at the Century 16 Movie Theatre in Colorado. (Center for American Progress Action Fund, 2013). These public shootings all have one thing in common with one another. Each shooting was conducted in a ‘gun free zone.’ With the exception of one, the attack on Congresswoman Gabrielle Gifford in 2011, every public mass shooting since the year 1950 occurred in a ‘gun free zone.’ When an area is rendered ‘gun free’ a false sense of safety for the surrounding citizens is provided. Many people assume that ‘gun free zones’ are safe places but in reality they create an optimal environment for a mass shooter looking for a place where they would not be faced with and resistance from their defenseless victims. In most criminals’ and mass shooters’ minds, there is no better place to open fire than one where their victims cannot fight back. There was an enormous issue recently and that is still ongoing today about rather to add to the gun control laws in the United States or not. In many states there are laws in place that prevent citizens carrying...
Words: 1353 - Pages: 6
...MSNBC. I focused to focus on these two segments from each channel. On FOX News, The Bill O’Reilly Factor segment, the discussion of gun rights laws is clearly slanted toward legal ownership of guns. I don’t enjoy hate type of humor or information. Bill attempts to substantiate the Conservative parties views toward gun control with the standard NRA-Conservative argument that Americans should bear the right to own arms, arms of any type. Not limited to sporting guns or collectables. His comments are sarcastic and confusing because they are vague, with no clear and factual point made. The fact is that Bill O’Reilly said nothing new as far as conservative views and gun rights are concerned. He continued to justify his argument by saying “guns don’t kill people, people kill people”. His argument is specious in design because it is a rationalization. People, in fact, use guns. Bill went as far as mentioning Hitler, and Nazi Germany’s very strict gun control laws. German soldiers took the guns from the Jewish people, and then turned on a defenseless people. Gun laws said to be made with “good” intentions that took guns out of the hands of the people Hitler wanted to persecute. Hitler was deceptive and outright dishonest about his intentions. His intentions were to disarm and exterminate a certain race and religion of people. I don’t find anything about Hitler funny; in fact I’m sensitive to the subject because all four of my grandparents were Holocaust survivors. MSNBC has a similar...
Words: 800 - Pages: 4
