Matthews, Jake. "For Lives and Liberty: Banning Assault Weapons in America." The Institute of Politics at Harvard University. Harvard University: Institute of Politics, 2015. Web. 5 Apr. 2015.
This article was written by students at Harvard’s Institute of Politics and provides an outstanding illustration of the debate regarding gun control and its two primary perspectives. The article identifies the topics exigence, or urgency, citing that 11,500 civilians died from firearm homicides in the year 2011. In addition to providing information regarding the viewpoints of conservatives and abolitionists, the article also cites the primary points each side uses to express their side’s legitimacy. Primarily, in regards to the perspective of conservatives, the article highlights the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the respectful conservation it deserves. On the other hand, the article provides various recent tragic events and startling statistics describing the lethality and unnecessary prevalence of firearms in America.
NRA Staff. "A Brief History of NRA." A Brief History of NRA. The National Rifle Association, n.d. Web. 5 Apr. 2015.
The NRA, a large contributor to the conservative position in regards to the debate over gun control, published this article briefly describing their organization. The article describes the founding of the National Rifle Association and its influences upon American society in the early twentieth century. These initial interactions between the National Rifle Association are arguably approximate factors in the large conservative majority of gun activists sweeping the discussion of gun control today.
DeGrazia, David. The Case for Moderate Gun Control (n.d.): n. pag. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal. Georgetown University. Web. 5 Apr. 2015.
DeGrazia’s article successfully describes critical information regarding events occurring in the early twenty-first century leading to the popularity of the debate. These backgrounds serve as references for understanding the exigence of gun control and the various rationalities for the primary points in regards to the debate’s various perspectives. However, in addition to the information regarding these infamous scenarios, DeGrazia’s article is most relevant in describing the view points of most individuals who classify themselves as “moderates.” These individuals, according to DeGrazia, understand the authority of the Constitution’s Second Amendment, but also identify the need for increased regulation given recent violent scenarios caused by firearms.
Lessenberry, Jack. "Ban All Guns, Now." Detroit Metro Times. N.p., 19 Dec. 2012. Web. 4 Apr. 2015.
This article in the Detroit Metro Times, takes an abolitionist perspective in the debate involving firearms. In addition, this particular article finds itself with a history of gun-violence, further bolstering its credibility from experience. In a separate 2013 article by the Huffington Post, Detroit had been named the “America’s most dangerous city” for its fourth consecutive year, citing its infamously high rate of homicide which is, in part, fueled by firearms. In the article, the stance for a ban on guns is adamant, supported by various scenarios which lead up to the ultimate claim that “nobody needs to have a handgun in America.” This statement, one of which is a common sentiment amongst abolitionists, is rationalized by citing infamous shootings that could easily have been avoided if average American families had not had firearms in their homes.
Trotter, Gayle S. "Should Congress Pass Stronger Gun Laws?." Congressional Digest 92.3 (2013): 25-31. Academic Search Premier. Web. 19 Feb. 2015.
Trotter’s article shows the perspective of advocates for gun-rights. The article describes the unjust nature of tighter regulation on firearms by penalizing the law-abiding and ineffectively preventing law-breaking individuals from illegally acquiring firearms. In addition, Trotter’s article also describes how the benefits of gun-rights outweigh the costs, by giving an example of a woman who was able to defend herself in a violent confrontation due to her firearm. For the purpose of the debate; however, the article’s importance is found in its accurate representation of the various talking points found in the speeches of firearm conservatives. These points, primarily that of the ineffectiveness of further gun control and the penalization it bestows on average Americans, are adamant throughout both the article and the conservative debate on gun control.
This article was written by students at Harvard’s Institute of Politics and provides an outstanding illustration of the debate regarding gun control and its two primary perspectives. The article identifies the topics exigence, or urgency, citing that 11,500 civilians died from firearm homicides in the year 2011. In addition to providing information regarding the viewpoints of conservatives and abolitionists, the article also cites the primary points each side uses to express their side’s legitimacy. Primarily, in regards to the perspective of conservatives, the article highlights the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the respectful conservation it deserves. On the other hand, the article provides various recent tragic events and startling statistics describing the lethality and unnecessary prevalence of firearms in America.
NRA Staff. "A Brief History of NRA." A Brief History of NRA. The National Rifle Association, n.d. Web. 5 Apr. 2015.
The NRA, a large contributor to the conservative position in regards to the debate over gun control, published this article briefly describing their organization. The article describes the founding of the National Rifle Association and its influences upon American society in the early twentieth century. These initial interactions between the National Rifle Association are arguably approximate factors in the large conservative majority of gun activists sweeping the discussion of gun control today.
DeGrazia, David. The Case for Moderate Gun Control (n.d.): n. pag. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal. Georgetown University. Web. 5 Apr. 2015.
DeGrazia’s article successfully describes critical information regarding events occurring in the early twenty-first century leading to the popularity of the debate. These backgrounds serve as references for understanding the exigence of gun control and the various rationalities for the primary points in regards to the debate’s various perspectives. However, in addition to the information regarding these infamous scenarios, DeGrazia’s article is most relevant in describing the view points of most individuals who classify themselves as “moderates.” These individuals, according to DeGrazia, understand the authority of the Constitution’s Second Amendment, but also identify the need for increased regulation given recent violent scenarios caused by firearms.
Lessenberry, Jack. "Ban All Guns, Now." Detroit Metro Times. N.p., 19 Dec. 2012. Web. 4 Apr. 2015.
This article in the Detroit Metro Times, takes an abolitionist perspective in the debate involving firearms. In addition, this particular article finds itself with a history of gun-violence, further bolstering its credibility from experience. In a separate 2013 article by the Huffington Post, Detroit had been named the “America’s most dangerous city” for its fourth consecutive year, citing its infamously high rate of homicide which is, in part, fueled by firearms. In the article, the stance for a ban on guns is adamant, supported by various scenarios which lead up to the ultimate claim that “nobody needs to have a handgun in America.” This statement, one of which is a common sentiment amongst abolitionists, is rationalized by citing infamous shootings that could easily have been avoided if average American families had not had firearms in their homes.
Trotter, Gayle S. "Should Congress Pass Stronger Gun Laws?." Congressional Digest 92.3 (2013): 25-31. Academic Search Premier. Web. 19 Feb. 2015.
Trotter’s article shows the perspective of advocates for gun-rights. The article describes the unjust nature of tighter regulation on firearms by penalizing the law-abiding and ineffectively preventing law-breaking individuals from illegally acquiring firearms. In addition, Trotter’s article also describes how the benefits of gun-rights outweigh the costs, by giving an example of a woman who was able to defend herself in a violent confrontation due to her firearm. For the purpose of the debate; however, the article’s importance is found in its accurate representation of the various talking points found in the speeches of firearm conservatives. These points, primarily that of the ineffectiveness of further gun control and the penalization it bestows on average Americans, are adamant throughout both the article and the conservative debate on gun control.