ktmeng/mec huggingface dataset:
Topic: gun-control

Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for private use within the home in federal enclaves. In 2010, in McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. __ (2010), the Supreme Court held that the right of an individual to keep and bear arms protected by the Second Amendment is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and applies to the states.
Topic: gun-control

That American citizens have a right to own firearms is conclusive and irrefutable. Due to this argument, it’s only right for the people of America to embrace the right to protect your homes and family by having the right to purchase a weapon. People also value the right to have a gun for personal pleasure. There are men and women that enjoy the sport of hunting and those of us that love to go out to a range and shoot at target. According to The Pros & Cons (2014), if we opt not to legalize guns, we would potentially increase Black Market trade and ruin commercial trade, hinder evidence for prosecution, influence effects of socialism and totalitarianism to be seen upon a country’s social and government infrastructures.
Topic: gun-control

Some people view guns as not being safe at all. People feel there aren’t enough restrictions for guns. There are far too many people with criminal backgrounds that have direct access to guns. Guns have been viewed as being an addition to violence. Over the years, we’ve seen children shooting children with their parent’s gun. Guns are easily accessible on the Black Market. Terrorists are utilizing guns to bully our citizens. According to Messerli (2012), Suicides and crimes of passion are higher with gun availability, as it’s much easier to act immediately on your impulses when a gun is available. As we can see, one could argue that we should ensure that guns remain legal in the U.S. and one could argue that we shouldn’t. Based on the information read, my team and I have come to the conclusion that the pros to legalizing guns should definitely win this argument. No one wants to violate the rights of the men and women of America.
Topic: gun-control

2013 has been embossed by recent incidents such as a Vegas shooting that ended the lives of three people, four gruesome murders in Orange County in California, and many more tragedies. It is estimated that there are 300 million guns in personal hands in the US today, many legally owned and others not (Neyfakh). Every year, close to four million guns find their way into the market (Nicolas and Nelson). This level of gun infiltration is alarming; it means that even the Supreme Court would find it hard to locate or seize these guns.
Topic: gun-control

Gun related violence has caused many to review their stances on the issue. In essence, gun violence is at an all-time high in the United States, as referred to by President Obama in the State of the Union Address; therefore, Unites States government should require criminal background checks for all gun sales, including those by private sellers that currently are exempt. Besides being at the top of Obama’s agenda, gun control is also an issue that has received enormous emphasis in the media.
Topic: gun-control

Statistics reveal that up to forty-five percent of all households in the US have a gun in their possession (ProQuest Staff). This shows that guns are too easy to access and their abundance in the US ought to concern many Americans. Many of those who advocate for gun control measure want a total ban. They would prefer the United States to become more like her neighbor Canada. There are few guns per capita in Canada and all guns have to be registered with the national government. This approach to the ownership of firearms has many advantages. Most of all, Canada’s rate of firearm homicide is a sixth to that of the US (Nicholas and Nelson).
Topic: gun-control

However, it is useless to argue for the application of the Canadian approach in the United States. Circumstances are extremely different. It is difficult to determine whether, and to what extent, American values and culture can yield to embrace the characteristic benefits derived from Canadian-style gun control. Clearly, Americans should embrace the White House’s resolution to the propagation of gun-related bloodshed in the US. Many voters concur with the president with regards to the proposals, especially on universal background checks and harsher penalties for wrongful gun purchases. The president’s take is synonymous with that of Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leaders, who has a positive rating from the National Rifle Association (NRA). To reiterate his position on the need for gun control measures, the president cited a string of mass shootings, which have happened during his tenure. Those who listened to the State of the Union Address comprised groups of people who had been directly or indirectly affected by gun violence.
Topic: gun-control

Though background checks are required in the US., due to the still-increasing rates of gun violence have proven them to be ineffective because of the various loopholes which put these lethal weapons in the hands of criminals and people who suffer from mental disabilities. With the current method, anytime someone buys a gun from a federally licensed gun dealer, the dealer is required to run a check on the buyer by submitting the name to the federal database. That database consists of criminal records and mental health records as provided by federal and state courts and agencies (Feldmann). Convicted felons and those determined by the courts to be dangerously mentally ill are prohibited by federal law from buying firearms. Also, states have added their own categories of who is prohibited from buying a gun. The downside is that there are loopholes in the current federal background check system.
Topic: gun-control

Forty percent of all firearms purchased in the United States are sold without background checks because the guns aren’t purchased from a federally licensed firearms dealer (Neyfakh). Any purchases that fall under this category are processed without proper background checks. Despite the objections to this proposal, the rate of gun violence is increasing at such a rapid rate that the American people must prioritize in order to help prevent such tragic and avoidable events such as the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting. They must put into perspective which of the following is more important to defend: the prevention of devastating mass shootings that have led to the homicide of over 8,583 people in 2012 through the use of extensive background checks, or the possible violation of citizens privacy (Neyfakh).
Topic: gun-control

This idea is already accepted by over ninety-two percent of Americans, according to a poll taken by the Huffington Post in January 2013*. If an extensive background check on Adam Lanza’s mother-the owner of the guns he used to commit the shootings of twenty-six children and teachers-the government might have been aware that her son, who has autism, may gain access to her military-grade weapons. Any skeptics must put into consideration that more time than not, public safety is more important than personal privacy in regards to gun violence prevention.
Topic: gun-control

In conclusion, universal and extensive background checks may be the single most important gun violence prevention measure that the government could adopt. This plan closes the loopholes which have greatly contributed to the extreme amount of gun violence in the United States. It will prevent criminals and mentally ill people from gaining access to them. Approving this form of background checks is necessary because gun violence is at an all-time high in the United States; therefore, Unites States government should require criminal extensive background checks for all gun sales, including those by private sellers that currently are exempt. Past attempts at preventing this type of violence have been proven to fail due to the various loopholes and the ever-increasing rate of gun-related deaths. It is time for the American people to take action to significantly decrease-and eventually eliminate-gun violence in the United States.
Topic: gun-control

Guns are capable of ending a precious life in a few minutes, thereby interrupting the natural life cycle. On the one hand, every effort is made by scientists and doctors to save and improve life expectancy. Researchers throughout the world are working to find cures for deadly diseases such as AIDS and cancer so that a human can live longer. On the other hand, guns are created to destroy the same lives that the doctors and scientists worked so hard to save. This is another reason why we just have to ban guns.
Topic: gun-control

For some time now the question of whether or not handguns should be legal to all citizens has haunted our society. Is it morally right for anyone to carry a gun and shoot it when they feel it to be necessary? Doesn’t the second amendment still hold true today? These question are ones that have been thrown back and forth between pro and anti gun users for some time and will probably continue for some time longer. There are people who say handguns in the home can only cause unneeded accidents.
Topic: gun-control

Also the fact that more people have died from criminal use of guns than people in the civil war. Some feel it is extremely easy for just about anyone to get access to a handgun. The laws in some states don’t require a waiting period , several forms of identification, or even a back round check. Anti-gun users feel that if handguns are illegal it may not be impossible for criminals to obtain them but it would be much more difficult. If that were true some believe there will be a drastic decrease in gang violence and armed robbery.
Topic: gun-control

Pro-gunners are aware of the many accidental deaths caused by the misuse of guns, however the fact remains that a numerous amount of people are killed each day by careless drivers. They are aware that accidental deaths can be caused by a variety of different things, so should they give up there right to own a gun to protect them if the need arises. Individuals that support the second amendment stand by the fact that it is better to have a gun and not need it then to need a gun and not have it. The question of whether or not guns should be legal is quite a difficult one to make. There may be a way to find an agreeable middle point. Perhaps the laws pertaining to acquiring a handgun could be changed to be more strict on who they give permits to carry a gun to.
Topic: gun-control

Getting a permit could require a full background check and several forms of identification. A waiting period of one to three weeks can be required and inforced. This could cut down on the fact that in some states anyone can walk into a gun shop and give a fake name and walk out with a gun that day. Another way to compromise would be to completely limit guns to shooting ranges and hunting grounds. That way those who feel the compulsion to use guns can be restrained to a location where less accidents can occur. It is possible to lessen the number of accidental deaths caused by guns without banning them completely.
Topic: gun-control

Gun control has become more and more of a hot-button topic in the United States, especially after events like the Sandy Hook shooting in 2012, when many people questioned the necessity of the second amendment in this day and age. Indeed, upholding the second amendment continues to be a difficult prospect when it does not seem like these guns are being used for good. However, the vast majority of people not only use them responsibly, but also protect themselves and their families, using these guns.
Topic: gun-control

Evidence of the effectiveness of firearms as a self-defense tool can be seen in numerous studies. For example, according to a study in 2000, an estimated 989,883 U.S. citizens used some form of gun to defend themselves (Agresti and Smith, 2). In addition, in 1993, 3.5% of households had used a firearm to defend themselves “for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere” (Agresti and Smith, 3). These numbers put gun control in a much more positive light, especially from the perspective that they should be used to increase security in an increasingly insecure country. The best way to prevent shooting incidents like the Sandy Hook shooting is not to simply remove all guns, as that will not fix the underlying problem, but to focus on rehabilitating people who either have had violent tendencies in the past, or exhibit symptoms that are consistent with mass shooters.
Topic: gun-control

Those who support gun control see each person in possession of a firearm, especially those with a concealed weapons license, as another potential Sandy Hook or Virginia State shooting just waiting to happen. That is a valid claim, since the potential is certainly there. The argument that “people don’t kill people, guns kill people” is another popular quote heard in the pro-gun control community, and while it has some merit, it requires some closer examination in order to determine the validity of the statement. While it is certainly true that a gun has the potential to kill someone, it is only a tool. The bigger issue when it comes to violent crimes, especially gun-crimes, is the individual behind the gun. To this end, one of the most effective solutions to the problem of gun violence in this country is to fix the underlying problem, not to simply take away the guns, because that would only invite more violence, especially from the more hardcore gun activists. And, of course, many deaths and injuries from violent crime come from firearms. For example, in 1996, 65 percent of all murders between spouses were performed with a firearm (Rand, 3).
Topic: gun-control

This is where the concept of firearms as a tool comes into play. A criminal who was determined to commit a crime would likely commit the same crime, regardless of whether or not firearms were allowed. Limiting firearms only succeeds in making everybody a potential helpless victim in the event of a shooting. In order to understand how firearms actually work as a deterrent to gun crime, it is necessary to understand that those who use guns for violent purposes (i.e. not in self defense) should be grouped into a different section than those who only use firearms for sport and self-defense. This has actually been done before, and refers to two types of gun ownership: criminal gun ownership and non-criminal gun ownership. For instance, a study taken in 1995 showed that “Where non criminal gun-ownership is higher, criminal gun ownership is also higher; and where criminal gun ownership is higher, the percent of crimes which are committed with guns is higher” (Squires, 197).
Topic: gun-control

Essentially, this means that guns beget more guns, which, in turn, beget more violence, or at least that is what this study shows. However, the issue is a little more complicated than that. For instance, many areas of the nation are simply violent by virtue of their inhabitants, and, even if guns were outlawed, they would still fight amongst themselves using whatever weapons are available. In addition, it is possible that many who live in these areas with large amounts of violence actually purchased guns themselves for the sole purpose of self defense, so that if they themselves were attacked by an assailant using a gun, they would not be completely helpless. Although firearms work well as a way to protect oneself, they also act as a threat of immediate vengeance by the victim, assuming the victim is in possession of a firearm. “A study showed that, in a survey of male felons in 11 state prisons, 34% had been “scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim,” while 40% said they decided not to commit a crime because they knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun, and 69% said they knew of another criminal who had not committed a crime because the victim had a firearm” (Agresti and Smith, 6).
Topic: gun-control

This helps to show what gun-advocates call the brighter side of the gun-control debate: that guns can, and oftentimes are, used as a self defense or deterrence measure, rather than a pure instrument of violence. This theory seems to hold some water, since a study shows that, in 1988, only about 30% of citizens owned guns. Yet, in 1996, that number had increased to 50% (Lott, 38). In 2004, that number remained steady. The interesting thing about these figures is that violent crime in America has actually been decreasing at a slow rate. While it would be foolish to blame this entirely on guns, it is a good indicator that guns at least function, on some level, as a deterrent and personal defense tool. The only problem, of course, stems from the fact that criminals have guns as well, but allowing virtually anyone to own a gun levels the playing field to an extent. If guns were totally outlawed, encounters would be much more one-sided, as criminals could attack citizens with little to no fear of immediate reprisal on the part of the victim. Gun control is a fairly black-and-white issue, yet seems to only have extremists on one side or the other. While it would be easy to simply dismiss all pro-gun control arguments, they do have some merit.
Topic: gun-control

For this reason, there must be consolations made in order to make guns a little bit safer for everybody. The best way to deal with this issue is continue allowing citizens to use firearms, but perhaps limit access to guns in order to ensure safety for the greatest number of people. Allowing firearms if the gun user registers and carries a permit for the firearm would help to reduce the number of homicides with firearms, if not as many people have them. Each action has its own drawbacks, however, and it is important to understand that, especially for this issue, which has undergone something of a deadlock in the recent past. Freedom and security should be balanced in equal measure, and it is important to come up with solutions to this issue with that in mind.
Topic: gun-control

Agresti, James D., and Reid K. Smith. “Gun Control Facts.” Just Facts (2008). 2-3 Lott, John R. More guns, less crime: Understanding crime and gun control laws. University of Chicago Press, 2013. 37-38 Rand, Michael R., et al. “Violence by intimates: Analysis of data on crimes by current or former spouses, boyfriends, and girlfriends.” (1998): 1-30. Squires, Peter. Gun Culture Or Gun Control?: Firearms and Violence: Safety and Society. Routledge, 2002. p.197
Topic: gun-control

I believe that guns should not be banned in the US. “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” I am sure most of us have heard this saying at some point in our lives. Surely, it is a statement of the obvious, but the logic behind it rings true. It may seem rational to ban guns entirely to prevent people from killing, but it is not the guns themselves that are the problem. That is just a simple solution to a complex problem.
Topic: gun-control

Outlawing firearms punishes the law-abiding citizens by leaving them defenseless against criminals who obtain their firearms illegally .Protecting yourself with a legally obtained firearm should not be against the law and should me more of a necessity for the safety of your family and property. The Department of Justice’s own National Institute of Justice study titled Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms estimated that 1.5 million Americans use guns for defensive purposes every year. People who commit crimes are already willing to break the law to kill someone, why wouldn’t they break the law and buy a firearm off the black market.
Topic: gun-control

As we’ve learned from the war on drugs, prohibiting a particular item only makes a stronger criminal enterprise. It would seem logical that the banning of firearms would lead to less firearms and less crime, but statistics show just the opposite. Washington D.C. has had a handgun ban in effect since 1976. After the ban, D.C.’s murder rate only once fell below what it was in 1976. Furthermore, Washington D.C. has been notorious for being one of the most violent cities in the country. Not only is this the case in the United States, but the trend continues in other countries around the world. For example, after firearms were banned in England and Wales in 1997, the number of deaths and injuries from gun crime increased 340 percent in the seven years from 1998 to 2005.
Topic: gun-control

The claim that guns are the problem is merely a scapegoat for larger socioeconomic problems such as poverty, drugs, poor parenting, and undesirable role models. As for the mass shootings that have become a staple for the fear mongering corporate media, it should be noted that every single mass shooter since columbine had been prescribed serotonin boosting psychiatric drugs, yet the media seldomly mention this and never correlate it with the crime. Perhaps they don’t want to point the blame towards their big pharmaceutical sponsors, whose ads bombard you during every commercial break. Furthermore the media also sensationalizes these shooters making them seem like martyrs for the next potential shooter. An abundance of registered firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens acts as a deterrent against crime.
Topic: gun-control

The city of Kennesaw, Georgia passed an ordinance in March of 1982 requiring each household to own and maintain a gun. Kennesaw’s crime rate dropped significantly after the ordinance, and there has not been a single murder over the twenty-six years that it has been in effect. The claims that a high gun ownership results in high amounts of violence is nothing more than a fabrication. Switzerland, a country known for having one of the highest rates of gun ownership in the world, also maintains one of the lowest firearm-related crime rates in the world. In areas where gun ownership is high, the threat of an armed civilian acts as a hindrance against the criminal element.
Topic: gun-control

Overall, I speculate that the United States will continue to see a reduction in crime in areas of rising gun ownership. A firearm ban would not stop crime and would only hurt responsible, law-abiding citizens. As long as there is a criminal element, people will always feel the need to protect themselves against a perceived threat. The second amendment was implemented by the founding fathers of the United States as a fundamental right of the people to protect themselves from all forms of tyranny. The right to keep and bear arms is deep-rooted in American culture, and it will not be going away any time soon.
Topic: gun-control

McNeil, Harold. “City governments group elect repeal of state’s weapon safety law.” Buffalo News, The (NY) 02 Mar. 2013: Points of View Reference Center. Web. 18 Apr. 2013. This short article demonstrates how an act known as the Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act changed by the State Senate and Assembly of New york city break the constitutional 2nd Modification of all individuals. The act was hurried to be signed into law on the very same day, however soon rescinded by state law makers, who desire to stress weapon laws for the psychological ill and lawbreakers.
Topic: gun-control

On December 12, 2012, twenty children and six adults were killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT. It was one of the deadliest school shootings in US history. The shooting renewed debate on the issue of gun control. It sparked a conflict between the Executive and Legislative branches over how best to deal with the situation. Unfortunately, the gun debate tends to be a black or white issue – either you are “for guns” or “against guns”. There seems to be little middle ground.
Topic: gun-control

Immediately after the Sandy Hook incident, the two sides were out making their case. With the one side of gun control stating that this incident would have never occurred if there was more gun control, while the other side felt that tightening control laws would not have prevented nor will it stop something like this from happening again. Within hours of the shooting, President Obama made a television statement in which he said, “we’re going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics”.
Topic: gun-control

Congress also took some action on the issue and voted on two pieces of legislation. On January 24, 2013, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 was introduced in the Senate. Although passing the Senate Judiciary Committee, the bill failed by a vote of 60 to 40. The other piece of legislation that was proposed during this time was universal background checks. The Manchin-Toomey Amendment was put to a vote that would have required background checks on most firearms sales. On April 17, 2013, the Senate voted against this amendment. In fact, the last major piece of gun control legislation to make it into law was the assault weapons ban of 1994. Ironically, the ban was only temporary and expired in 2004. Repeated attempts to renew it have failed. In spite of the increased and heightened emotion following the Sandy Hook incident, no additional gun control legislation was made into law. This fact shows just how divided and how little room for compromise exists on the matter.
Topic: gun-control

The people for and against gun control make up one most divided groups on a policy issue. The feelings they both have are strong and are deeply held. On the side for gun control, the argument is that if guns were more difficult to obtain, there would be less violent crimes being committed. One of the pro gun control facts is that more than half of all murders in any given year are attributed to gun violence. With stricter laws, less people would have access to these weapons. Simply put, with no guns…no one can be killed with a gun. The anti gun control people also have a compelling argument. They stand firmly behind the Second Amendment, which is the right to bear arms. One of their statistics is that the USA has the most heavily armed civilian population by a large margin; however, we are not even in the top 20 in our gun murder victims. They say that guns are not the problem, the people are the problem.
Topic: gun-control

They feel it should not be difficult or impossible for a law-abiding citizen to buy a rifle for hunting season, or a pistol to protect their family. They feel that gun control laws will not stop the wrong people from obtaining weapons, so the problem is not going to be solved by simply creating more gun control laws. With the millions of people who live in the United States, it is an impossible request that everyone agree. Especially if our politicians continue to only propose “all or nothing” solutions. I believe that there is a solution to this problem, and that more needs to be done to try and stop the senseless killing of innocent people. Although nothing is foolproof, we must try to do all we can to prevent another Sandy Hook. There is too much carnage and damage that someone can do with the assault weapons and high capacity magazines available today. We already have many good federal and state laws on the books regarding guns and gun control.
Topic: gun-control

Unfortunately, they are not all being followed or properly enforced. We should start there. One change I would make is to standardize gun registration across the nation. This is currently a state issue and each state has different standards and procedures. Doing this would have many benefits. First, it will make it much easier to follow and implement the laws already in place. By standardizing the procedure, you can then more easily create a national database with this information, which can be accessed by each state. I believe this process would help to prevent smuggling between states. In order to gain the support of the pro gun group, this process cannot overshadow state laws on gun ownership. Another possible solution I would make involves the design and manufacture of firearms. Gun manufactures have done very little to make their products safer. I believe we can pressure gun manufactures, as we have done with other manufacturers of consumer products, to make their products safer and less likely to discharge accidentally.
Topic: gun-control

An example of increased safety due to changes in design and manufacturing is the automobile. The technology currently exists that would instantly make guns safer for the public. There are safety devices that prevent accidental discharge. In addition, there are other devises that a gun owner could activate on a stolen gun that would render it completely unusable. For some reason, gun manufacturers have been reluctant to market or to make these types of devises available. I believe these are two possible solutions that could break the gridlock and make a positive impact on this problem. Gun control is one of the most hotly debated social problems we are facing today. Little has been done to resolve the problem due to the “all-or-nothing” legislative proposals that have been introduced. The two solutions I’ve presented would be effective because they allow both groups to claim a victory. Neither group has to totally abandon its beliefs or cave to the other side. This is a solution involving a compromise. This issue is so polarizing; I feel that little will be done if a solution involving a compromise cannot be reached. In any case, gun control issues will be around for long time.
Topic: gun-control

The argument on firearm regulation has been a heated discussion for many years. On one side of the debate, we have people in favor placing restrictions on guns, while, on the opposite end of the spectrum, we have people fighting the regulation of guns. People in favor gun restrictions believe gun control can reduce crime ,while, the people against gun control believe having the right to bear arms is an effective crime deterrent. I believe that every law abiding citizen should be able to carry a gun and defend themselves against people who intend to harm them.
Topic: gun-control

The more gun control rules and regulations there are, the happier the criminals will be, for they know the more gun laws there are the less chance they have of having a crime victim defend themselves with a lawfully-owned firearm. In many right to carry states, crime statistics are lower than the states with gun laws. The reason why is because guns are used more defensively than criminally. Criminals are usually rolling the dice when they are targeting law abiding citizens in right to carry states. (Polsby) Criminals do not fear the police or other authorities. What they fear most is the citizens who might be potentially armed. It makes it harder for criminals because they do not know what to expect from them if they’re planning to rob them. They’re either fortunate to have an unarmed victim or they become a victim with a citizen that is ready to shoot and defend their families. (Stossel).
Topic: gun-control

Gun control laws only affect the citizens who follow the law. The law does not apply to the criminals. Regardless if theres a gun ban or not, criminals will find a way to obtain guns. The gun laws have no way in curtailing the illegal arms trade. In Chicago, handguns are not for sale legally. Only shotguns, rifles and ammunition can be bought with people with a Firearm Owners Identification Card. The Chicago area is one of the most difficult places to legally obtain a gun.
Topic: gun-control

In order to get a gun license, people have to go through a background check and wait up to a month to legally carry a weapon.(Polsby). While it is difficult to legally possess a gun, it is way more easier to illegally carry a gun in Chicago. There are thousands of unregistered firearms in the streets with thousands more coming in every month. Banning the sale handguns in Chicago makes no difference as well too. People can go elsewhere to buy a gun. They can go out of town or even out of state to buy a gun with Indiana and Wisconsin in close proximity.(Moorhouse and Warner).
Topic: gun-control

Another example why gun control law are ineffective is the staggering increase in crime in England since they imposed a ban on guns. In 1997, England passed a ban on all guns, which makes it illegal for all citizens to carry guns. England’s gun sanctions made it one of the most strictest law in the world. The new law only created an illusion of the country being more safer. Instead of reducing crime, the law put it’s citizens at the mercy of criminals who are well assured that their would be victims are unarmed and defenseless. In the two years after the law was enacted, gun related crimes increased to 40% and armed robberies rose to 53%. From 1997 to 2001, violent crimes more than doubled. People are six times more likely to be robbed at gunpoint in London compared to New York. In the United States, the occurrence of home burglaries is 13% because the majority of burglars fear armed homeowners more than they fear the law. England’s burglary statistics are 5 times higher compared to the United States at 55%. England’s gun ban created the unintended consequences of lawlessness in the streets, as well as, it did not stop criminals from possessing guns and committing crimes. (Malcolm)
Topic: gun-control

Even in the United states where states and cities that passed strict gun laws have found them to be ineffective. The places where gun control laws are the most strictest are places that have the most crimes are committed with firearms.(Piquero). Of the 15 states that have the highest homicide rates, 10 have very restrictive gun laws. New York, for example, has one of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation has 20 percent of the nations total of armed robberies. Another example, Washington D.C., since guns were banned in 1976 the murder rate has risen 200 percent. In Chicago, the city consistently had one of the highest homicide rates in the nation since they enacted a ban on gun in 1982. In May 2010, a month before the Supreme Court overturned the ban, Chicago already had 113 homicides for the year.(Piquero).
Topic: gun-control

Since gun restriction laws were repealed by the Supreme court in 2010, Chicago and Washington D.C. received significantly lower crime rates. The murder rate in Chicago in the first six months of 2011 is 14% lower than the first six months of 2010. This is the first significant drop in the murder rate since gun sanctions were first passed in 1982. In 2008, the Supreme Court lifted the gun ban in D.C. in the case of the District of Columbia vs. Heller. Since the gun ban was repealed, the murder rate in D.C. has dropped 35% from 2008-2010. The rate of assault with weapons decreased by 37% and armed robberies fell as well too by 25% (Lott). These statistics further prove how ineffective gun control laws are. Not only they do not work in reducing crime they create adverse effects on crime. Instead, they make the problems worst.
Topic: gun-control

I believe that the right to bear arms is an unalienable right and I don’t believe that government have that right to take it away. I feel that all citizens have the right to protect themselves and their families. Gun laws restricting the use of guns does not help law abiding citizens. These laws only take away the ability of each citizens to defend themselves and makes us helpless against criminals. Gun control only creates an illusion that a society is safer and it does not solve the root cause crime. One cannot solve the crime problem by just simply taking away guns.
Topic: gun-control

All guns have the potential to be dangerous and should be dealt with precaution. Guns have been a part of American history for as long as people can remember. For most individuals guns are supposed to be very dangerous and unsafe. Though, that is not true. Guns can be hazardous, but only if they are in the wrong hands. Owning a gun is a right that every American should take pride in having. Guns are used for self-protection, hunting, law enforcement and other practices.
Topic: gun-control

And, if the government bans guns, only criminals will have access to them since they already get them from drug dealers. Therefore, when confronted by a criminal, civilians would have no way to defend themselves.Argumentative Essay against Gun Control Since 1980, forty-four states have passed laws allowing gun owners to carry concealed weapons outside their homes for personal protection. (Five additional states had these laws before 1980. Illinois is the sole holdout.) A federal ban on the possession, transfer, or manufacture of semiautomatic assault weapons, passed in 1994, was allowed to expire in 2004.
Topic: gun-control

In 2005, Florida passed the Stand Your Ground law, an extension of the so-called castle doctrine, exonerating from prosecution citizens who use deadly force when confronted by an assailant, even if they could have retreated safely; Stand Your Ground laws expand that protection outside the home to any place that an individual “has a right to be.” Twenty-four states have passed similar laws. Guns, therefore, are necessary in today’s society for our protection
Topic: gun-control

There is no point to implement gun control considering the reality that criminals will still find a way to procure guns if they want to do so. Criminals will always make sure to have access to the guns that they need to execute their crimes successfully. They usually have connections to other influential people that can provide them with the guns and weapons that they need in order to execute their crimes. The bottom line is that if the criminals want to have access to guns, they will be able to get them even if there is a gun control policy in place. This law will not stop them from having guns if they are desperate to have them.
Topic: abortion

Eric Knight begins chapter three with a parable which illustrates the entirety of chapter three. The parable then transitioned into the introduction of, author, Thomas Malthus, Malthus then help a main position in the chapter. Malthus was fearful that the population growth would cause a food shortage, through the chapter Knight introduced a few other people and their views which correlated with Malthus. One correlation came further into the chapter when Eric Knight introduced William Stanley Jevons, an economist. Jevons believed that the population growth would cause a coal shortage.
Topic: abortion

It is carefully cultivated through systems and processes that easily disappear if they are not acknowledged and nurtured.” When showing concern about the rapid population growth, and the fact that it is thought to have caused several potential shortages, people immediately though, the answer was to reduce population size. Knight then gave an example from ecologist, Garrett Hardin, and bestselling author, Paul Ehrlich, “The world was growing too quickly and something had to give if we were to maintain a healthy planet. Ehrlich and Hardin argued that meant stopping population growth.
Topic: abortion

” Morally they were trying to come to a solution that would benefit themselves instead of politically looking at what is in the best interest of the population as a whole. As for abortion in today’s time people automatically fight against it because it is “murder” in the sense that performing an abortion is taking a human life, and even though the child has yet to be wrong and won’t know the difference, it is morally wrong to kill someone. In 1948 people’s morals were the opposite, they thought for themselves.
Topic: abortion

In 1948 Garrett Hardin Felt as if people were still going to bear children, then there may be a need for legislation to limit people’s freedom by instituting a law requiring women rget compulsory abortions (forced abortions). In sixty years, people’s views and morals have dramastically changed. The main difference in these experiences is now, no one wants to force abortions, the moral dilemma here is giving women a choice, in the 1940’s the dilemma was, the population was too high, so forced abortions were an option to solve their problem. Other differences are, now morally people want to argue about harm to the baby, pain of the baby, the baby doesn’t have a voice to speak up, mother’s will regret having an abortion in the future, and hundreds more of little arguments. Back then, at that moment in history, abortion was solely to limit population growth in fear that everything they have will disappear.
Topic: abortion

Planned Parenthood is a very debatable topic for people. I believe that there should still be Planned Parenthood, because it offers medical services, just like a normal pharmacy or hospital. Furthermore there’s nothing wrong with abortion; a fetus cannot even feel or think anything yet. However, there are politicians who try to get rid of this service, and they claim that Planned Parenthood was disposing of aborted fetuses in landfills. These were Ohio politicians, and the attorneys for Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit in federal court on Sunday claiming that the politicians were trying to ban abortion.
Topic: abortion

I think this isjust stupid, because the politicians are trying to find any excuse they can in order to ban abonion. It shouldn’t even matter where the fetuses are disposed of. However, Planned Parenthood claims that the fetuses are disposed of according to Ohio’s laws, so everything should be fine. On Sunday, Donald Trump made a comment to Justice Scalia‘s comment of how black students would perform better in “slower-track” universities.
Topic: abortion

Trump said that it was “very tough”, In this way, he is not being his racist usual self, and he is defending the black people. I don’t think he has really gone against black people in the past (’2) but if he did, then he might be saying this to try to gain some more supporters. He thought that Justice Scalia’s comment was “very tough to the African-American community”. However, he’s not really going out of his way to attack Justice Scalia.
Topic: abortion

Choices are easy to be made and regrets are haunting like nightmares. A decision to terminate a fetus in the womb of the mother is painful to both physical and mental health. Abortion has always remained as a controversial dispute in the United States. The actual value of human life begins with the birth from a mother’s womb. Although it is a heartbreaking decision for every single mother to kill her own child, some decisions are made due to different circumstances, such as medical conditions, rape, or teenage pregnancies.
Topic: abortion

Abortion is known as “termination” or “killing” of embryos. Many people think abortion as the murder of an unborn child but there are many situations where abortion is a reasonable and beneficial choice. Abortions happen due to an unplanned/accidental pregnancy, unaffordability to raise a child due to economic or social reasons, rape, fetal abnormality, a risk of losing the woman’s life during pregnancy. There are different types of abortion procedures depending on cases; Suction Abortion which is an early-term abortion, Dilation, and Evacuation which is a mid-term abortion and Dilation and Extraction which is a late-term abortion.
Topic: abortion

She knows what the best is that she can do for the betterment of her and baby. A source from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) said, “the risk of death associated with childbirth is approximately 14 times higher than that with abortion.” For example, my mother’s friend was diagnosed to check the condition of both mother and baby during her second trimester. Unfortunately, the reports showed that the child had failed to develop one part of the brain and chromosomal abnormalities. During this stage, there is a chance of the mother risking her life. Thus, facing all challenges and grievances she had to opt the option of abortion for a better life of both child and mother. There are also times when the male partner does not support during pregnancy which might lead to stress, tension, and loneliness of being a single parent.This leads to miscarriage and other complications. A survey says “Improved psychological outcomes”(Lipp, Allyson) when there is someone to support during this phase.Sometimes not only health but also emotional support and care is necessary. If they lack that it is dangerous to her psychological conditions. Medical conditions are unexpected that reality a woman faces. People must have their rights to choose their life as it is constitutional rights of every woman. Therefore, abortion have their own benefits to survive a life at times of complications and needs in a woman’s life. A decision for good quality living and health is much better than choosing a life which is horrible after birth.
Topic: abortion

The worst thing you can imagine is being pregnant after being raped. Have you ever imagined what a person goes through during that phase? What does the society do in that situation? As the victim being raped has a negative effect on her brain and experiences trauma when they cannot bear both pains together. This affects her overall psychological health and may experience difficulties. “One-half (49.8%) reported their practice screens for pregnancy resulting from rape” (Perry, pg 1) The pregnancy rates from rape has been increasing lately in many countries. Abortion could help the victim at this time as she could avoid having a child due to rape and avoid managing her child and herself after going through a horrible time. It could also help her in focusing to recover from the trauma she experienced.
Topic: abortion

Pregnancy is a time frame when a woman carries a fragile soul inside her womb. Teenage pregnancy is burdensome as teenagers have fragile hearts and the teenage parent would have to manage another delicate soul along with theirs. Parenting is one of the hardest responsibilities and duty. As a parent, responsibility multiplies. There are over 600,000 births each year in the US which is caused by 1 million 15-19 year-olds. Most of the time, the pregnancies are unintentional and these mothers are unprepared to manage their new life. Teenage pregnancy can often ruin a teenage parent’s life as they have to receive education and manage her baby simultaneously. The choice of abortion can solve the problem of more than a million teens. By choosing to abort, they would be able to save themselves from ruining their lives and ruining their baby’s life due to the teen parent’s unmanageability. “Teen pregnancy and motherhood rates stand at 18%. About one in every five adolescent girls (aged 15 to 19) has either had a live birth or is pregnant with her first child. Rates increase with age: from 3% among girls at 15 years old to 40% among girls at 19 years.” (Mutua, par 2) With the rise of teenage pregnancy in Kenya, teenage parents’ lives could be devastated due to their irresponsibility. Abortion could help in correcting their mistake of being irresponsible and save the lives of most of the teens from being ruined due to parenthood which they are not capable of managing. Thus, abortion could massively decrease the number of teenage parenthood cases.