Stricter Gun Control
For American citizens, the right to bear arms is granted to us in the United States constitution. The constitution 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” (CITE). However, guns have changed dramatically since the constitution was written. Now, guns have the capacity to kill more people, quicker than ever before. And far too often, guns are not used for protection or self-defense, but to intentionally harm the innocent. For this reason, political figures, social activists and members of the general public have called into question what is really outlined and protected under the 2nd amendment. For example, are all guns permitted,
…show more content…
Most authors, however, do believe that mass shootings in the United States contribute to a push for stricter gun control regulations. McGinty, for example, argues that gun control is often a public policy that gets pushed to the back of the political agenda. However, she argues that the short period of time following a mass shooting opens a window of opportunity for the discussion for the possibility of stricter gun control (2016, 3). Kevin Wozniak, author of “Public Opinion About Gun Control Post–Sandy Hook,” also argues that massing shootings open the window for discussion about stricter gun control regulations (2015, 255). Similarly, Adena Gruskin mentions several incidents where mass shootings occurred. Gruskin specifically mentions the Columbine massacre and the Sandy Hooks shooting. Then, Gruskin lists specific pieces of legislature that were passed following each of these massacres (2014, 5). The aforementioned articles are helpful when constructing my article because they provide qualitative and quantitative data that supports the argument that legislature for …show more content…
Schumer and Presser go on to say that when the short burst of public outcry is over, attention fades from the issue of gun control until the next mass shooting occurs. Schumer and Presser, like Kleck, attribute this loss of attention to the fact that the proponents of gun rights are often more passionate about protecting their rights than proponents of gun control are passionate about regulating guns (2013, 2). Additionally, Robert Wolpert and James Gimpel argue that gun owners are concerned with protecting their self-interest, which is why gun owners are often opposed to stricter gun control regulations (1998, 241). With this understanding, one can see the perspective of those that oppose stricter gun control regulations. With understanding of the opposing side’s perspective, one can be more prepared to refute the opposing argument. For this reason, the articles written by Schumer and Presser and Wolpert and Gimpel are extremely beneficial when preparing to refute the other side’s
Most authors, however, do believe that mass shootings in the United States contribute to a push for stricter gun control regulations. McGinty, for example, argues that gun control is often a public policy that gets pushed to the back of the political agenda. However, she argues that the short period of time following a mass shooting opens a window of opportunity for the discussion for the possibility of stricter gun control (2016, 3). Kevin Wozniak, author of “Public Opinion About Gun Control Post–Sandy Hook,” also argues that massing shootings open the window for discussion about stricter gun control regulations (2015, 255). Similarly, Adena Gruskin mentions several incidents where mass shootings occurred. Gruskin specifically mentions the Columbine massacre and the Sandy Hooks shooting. Then, Gruskin lists specific pieces of legislature that were passed following each of these massacres (2014, 5). The aforementioned articles are helpful when constructing my article because they provide qualitative and quantitative data that supports the argument that legislature for …show more content…
Schumer and Presser go on to say that when the short burst of public outcry is over, attention fades from the issue of gun control until the next mass shooting occurs. Schumer and Presser, like Kleck, attribute this loss of attention to the fact that the proponents of gun rights are often more passionate about protecting their rights than proponents of gun control are passionate about regulating guns (2013, 2). Additionally, Robert Wolpert and James Gimpel argue that gun owners are concerned with protecting their self-interest, which is why gun owners are often opposed to stricter gun control regulations (1998, 241). With this understanding, one can see the perspective of those that oppose stricter gun control regulations. With understanding of the opposing side’s perspective, one can be more prepared to refute the opposing argument. For this reason, the articles written by Schumer and Presser and Wolpert and Gimpel are extremely beneficial when preparing to refute the other side’s