Author: theshocker69

Annotated Bibliography- theshocker69

1. “Jim Jefferies Has Got Gun Control All Wrong. • /r/progun.” Reddit. Therevenantrising, 20 June 2015. Web. 13 Nov. 2016.

Background: This is an anonymous reddit user’s post regarding his opinions on Jim Jefferies’ view on gun control. Although social media may not be one of the most reliable sources on the internet, events and statistics listed here are facts

How I Used It: This source worked out great for me because I was already familiar with Jefferies’ performance, this post dissected almost each sentence from his presentation. This made my dissection of his show much easier since it was all organized so neatly on this page.

2. “List of Massacres in Australia.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2016.

Background: This source is simply a list of Massacres that have occurred in Australia all throughout it’s history.

How I used it: I used this source to find out exactly how many massacres have occurred since Australia’s gun ban. I was able to find the date of the original massacre that caused the gun ban, and the long line of massacres listed thereafter. This helped to prove my point that gun control is counterintuitive to common beliefs.

3. “Locke ‘N Load: John Locke d YOUR Second Amendment Rights.” Intro to Political Theory Blog. Sabalaba, 24 Nov. 2009. Web. 13 Nov. 2016.

Background: This web page was originally designed to convey philosopher John Locke’s view of gun control, the philosophical viewpoint of a firearm, and also to explain the need for firearms to defend against our government.

How I used it: I was able to use this source to have guns perceived in a light they are not usually viewed in. The comparison of a firearm to your natural right to defend yourself and your loved ones is not a straw man, it is an accurate representation. Further, the explanation of firearms as a natural right, given to us by nature, was able to help me further show my point

4. Ghost Guns. Perf. Anonymous Performers. Underworld Inc. National Geographic Network, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2016. 

Background: “Ghost Guns” is an episode of National Geographic’s, “Underworld Inc.” In this episode, the producers focused on the illegal gun trade, it’s traffic along our borders, and how it affects our society.

How I used it: This episode was very helpful to my paper. The show gave me so much information on how these guns are moved across our country. I learned more about the techniques that these cartels utilize in order to bring these illegal firearms across the border and I put that information in my paper.

5. “Assault Weapon Truth: The Facts about Assault Weapons.” Assaultweapontruth. Assault Weapon Truth, n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2016. <http://www.assaultweapontruth.com>.

Background: This website has all the information you could ever need on assault rifles, how they are organized, what constitutes an assault rifle, and even information on gun bans.

How I used it: I used this website to help me explain the legal definition of an assault weapon. I also learned how assault weapons are organized, the difference between an assault rifle and other guns, and I inserted this information into my paper.

6. Lott, John R., Jr. More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws. Chicago, and London: U of Chicago, 2010. Print.

Background: More Guns, Less Crime is an educational textbook originally designed for law and justice majors at the University of Chicago. I felt this would be an interesting source to use since it was written in Chicago, one of the cities with the strictest gun laws in America, but yet, also have some of the most crime in the nation.

How I Used It: The only chapter of this book that really pertained to my research topic and what I was attempting to deliver was chapter 5, “The Victims and the Benefits from Protection”. From this chapter, I was given large amounts of information, linking the causal chain that will extend from gun control. This information was of dire importance in my “Security” and “Problems arising from gun control” sections of my research paper.

7. Lott, John R., Jr. The Bias Against Guns: Why Almost Everything You’ve Heard About Gun Control Is Wrong. Washington DC: Regnery, 2003. Print.

Background: I came across this source on accident, turns out it is the same author for my last source “More Guns, Less Crime”. This is another law and justice textbook, however, this one goes over the Federal Rules of Evidence in more detail, and went over how gun control disarms law-abiding citizens while arming criminals.

How I Used It: This source gave me greater insight to how gun control is able to disarm American citizens, and arm criminals; creating sitting ducks, and why this is detrimental to our society. This source helped me in my “safety” section and smaller idiosyncrasies throughout my research paper.

8. Jacobs, James B. “The Value of Firearms.” Can Gun Control Work? Oxford: Oxford U, 2002. 14-16. Print.

Background: I saw this article as a critical engagement piece that serves to analyze society and attempt to reform based off of discourse. This book does not give a clear side whether the author is for or against gun control. The author only supplies facts, which is what I intended to deliver.

How I Used It: The section I payed most attention to in this book was the section titled “The Value of Firearms” in which the author detailed the importance of a firearm for defense, as well as the perceived assumption of security that comes with the firearm.

Research Position Paper- theshocker69

Over the years, the United States citizens have been torn over the subject of gun control. Much of the confusion within this topic results from a lack of education pertaining to firearms. Within deliberation of accurate information comes positive reformation. Therefore, American citizens and legislation must be thoroughly informed in the complex subject of firearms.

Classifications of Firearms

The most basic classification of firearms is the machine gun classification. A machine gun is any fully-automatic weapon that may be either portable or mounted. Machine guns were outlawed in 1986, which made the sale or transfer of such firearms illegal under federal law.

Machine guns are then organized further as submachine guns, battle rifles, assault rifles, autocannons, automatic shotguns, and confusingly enough, assault weapons.

Assault rifles are classified as firearms capable of selective fire, utilizing an intermediate cartridge with a detachable magazine operating at an effective range of at least 110 feet. An intermediate cartridge is a bullet casing less powerful than battle rifle cartridges while a detachable magazine is an ammunition storage system and feeding apparatus attached to the rifle. Any firearm that fails to meet these requirements will not qualify as an assault rifle.

Differences Between Assault Weapons and Assault Rifles & Federal Assault Weapons Ban

The classification of Assault Weapons was created by legislation to expand the category of assault rifles. Assault weapons are classified as semi-automatic, rifle-style firearms that incorporate weapon modifications commonly affiliated militaristic weaponry. Assault weapons are required to accept a detachable magazine, and two of the following: a pistol grip beneath the weapon’s action, bayonet mount, folding/telescoping stock, suppressor/ suppressor capability, or a grenade launcher.

Assault rifles are authorized for military-use only. On September 13th, 1994, President Bill Clinton enacted the Federal Assault Weapons Ban. The bill was signed into action with the purpose to prohibit the manufacturing and civilian transfer, possession, and use of assault weapons, to expire in 10 years.

The National Rifle Association (NRA), stubbornly opposed the ban, reasoning, “Assault weapons are used in only one percent of all crimes,” which was then proven to be true by the 1999 crime statistics resourced by the Department of Justice. Further, the ban punished the transfer of possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices. In the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, large capacity ammunition feeding devices are defined as, “any magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device manufactured after [September 13, 1994] that has the capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition,” this creates frustration in gun owners because most magazines carry more than 10 rounds. However, the Federal Assault Weapons Ban utilized a grandfather clause which allowed the possession or transfer of weapons, or ammunition, that was possessed lawfully before September 13, 1994. As a result of the grandfather clause, the same amount of weapons remained on our streets in the hands of others, capable of abuse.

The AR-15 “assault weapon” lacks the capability of selective fire. This forces the rifle to shoot semi-automatically, that is, one bullet per pull of the trigger. This fact alone proves the AR-15’s fire rate to be much lower than the M4A1 assault rifle, which is fully automatic and fires much faster than the AR-15’s maximum of 45 fired bullets per minute. David Kopel, a writer for The Wallstreet Journal expresses, “What some people call ‘assault weapons’ function like every other normal firearm- they fire only one bullet each time the trigger is pressed… Some of these guns look like machine guns, but they do not function like machine guns.” Here, Kopel asserts that firearms like the AR-15 function just as normally as a standard hunting rifle does. These firearms lack the capability to cause the havoc an assault rifle is capable of.

Assault weapons operate identically to all other firearms, such as a hunting rifle, shotgun, ranch guns, even pistols. However, it is the startling appearance of these firearms that affect the perceptions of the uneducated. For this reason, large publics within our social sphere insight a stigma around the object. According to a report released in 1998 by the Violence Policy Center, “The weapon’s menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons- anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun- this can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.” A fair portion of our society lacks in-depth knowledge towards the subject of firearms. These individuals can not recognize the difference between a “menacing” AR-15 and any machine gun.

Assault Weapons do not differ in any way from their semiautomatic counterparts. Aesthetically, these weapons are very intimidating, especially when compared to other firearms on the market. However, this does not mean they function differently. Any pistol holds almost the same capability for destruction that any assault weapon has. To claim assault weapons are just as dangerous as assault rifles is an illogical assertion.

In 1989, suspect Patrick Purdy entered the Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton California and proceeded to fire 106 rounds from his AR-15 in 180 seconds, wounding 32 and leaving 5 children dead. Following, Purdy took his own life with a handgun. In comparison, assault rifles hold the ability to fire 300-1800 bullets in one minute. Clearly, the situation could have been seriously worsened had the firearm been a fully automatic assault rifle. Theoretically, the entire situation could be avoided completely if both categories of guns were criminalized. However, this argument serves to analyze the major differences between the two classifications, rather than question the legality of the firearms.

Legal

It is often forgotten that official legislation of a law does not hinder one’s ability to commit a crime. The law allows governmental consequence if the individual is caught committing the crime and is later found guilty in a court of law. A perfect example to illustrate this point is the enactment of the War on Drugs. The War on Drugs was enacted by the Nixon administration and it ultimately focused on ending addiction by prohibiting the manufacturing, use, and distribution of illegal narcotics. As a result of this prohibition, 48.6 percent of all incarcerated inmates are serving time for drug-related offenses, addiction rates are at an all-time high, and crime rates rose perilously. As a result, our nation is now the global leader in the amount of incarcerated inmates. Although we had legislative policies designed to end the use of drugs, a large portion of society chose to do them. Applying this logic to the topic of gun control would cause American families to forfeit their natural right of self defense, ultimately resulting vulnerable targets. It seems counterintuitive that a plan geared towards an anti-violence movement could have the capability for such terroristic acts.

International Security

Terroristic threats are a credible fear and a real possibility, contrary to popular belief.

Right now, the Mexican Drug Cartel operates on large portions of the Mexican border. The cartel has littered our borders with underground tunnels, used as pathways for smuggling unregistered weapons and narcotics across our borders. Currently, the border that is shared between America and Mexico is not secure enough for such revolutionary regulation. The cartel forwards a constant flow of machine guns, pistols, assault rifles, and even grenades into our country. All of which, are untraceable- unable to be routed back to the original owner. If there were a nationwide-gun sweep that could theoretically eliminate all guns from our streets, these illegal weapons will still flood into our neighborhoods. As a result, criminals will be equipped with their firearms, while law-abiding citizens have no leg to stand on.

Further, studies have found that Americans use guns 1.3 million times annually to protect themselves from an intruder, rapist, or mugger. Without defensive firearms, there would have been roughly 1.3 million extra fatalities each year. Also, the possession of a firearm in a house can give the family a feeling of excess security. The situation is comparable to life insurance, as it serves as a social benefit even if the owner of the policy does not die. The family still has the overall feeling of safety.

Problems Arising From Gun Regulation

In order for gun control to be deemed a possibility, our government would be required to enact a nation-wide firearm collection program, attempting to remove all guns from all American houses. This expectation is ridiculous upon realization that there are over 300 million guns belonging to over 324 million gun-toting citizens. Some of which live in desolate, urban areas, out-of-reach and out-of-mind for our government to collect from. Further, the assumption that our 1.1 million law enforcement officers would be able to eradicate such a large amount of firearms within such a large, diverse land is an unreasonable expectation. In the unlikely scenario this nation-wide collection was imposed, the ritual would leave many guns behind; a danger for the defenseless families.

The stripping of firearms from American families would leave weapons in the hands of only two type of people: law enforcement and criminals. Whilst in possession of their illegally-obtained firearm, criminals will continue to commit their crimes against society. As the crime is being carried out, all individuals incorporated in the situation are unable to defend themselves. Law enforcement officers, the victim’s only form of defense, will then take an average of 7 minutes to arrive at the scene of the crime. Many dark events could take place within these 7 dire minutes. Especially upon realization that a fully automatic machine gun could fire up to 12,600 rounds within that timeframe. This is a perfectly reasonable situation that could become a reality following gun regulation.

Ethical Reasoning

The nullification of our second amendment cannot be warranted if there are actual uses for a firearm in a civil society.

For reasons regarding the survival of Alaskan families, the topic of gun control becomes an ethical dilemma. Most Alaskan citizens are gun owners who utilize their firearms for food and defense. Alaska is a largely untouched area of land, as a result, it is of great trouble to navigate, poses many dangers, and lacks a food commonplace. This means that Alaskans are subject to danger that the average American is privileged enough to never encounter, and these families must hunt and prepare their own food for survival. Without their firearms, the family will starve to death. To seize these family’s right to a gun when they have no other option for food is inhumane. Hypothetically, if gun regulation included a clause allowing the use of firearms within Alaskan families, this would open up buying locations for criminals to then transport their guns across the country.

According to philosopher, John Locke, no individual requires a democratic constitution to grant them the right to defend themselves or their families. This has been granted a natural right, as it is a right given to us by nature.

Lastly, our founding fathers granted us the second amendment not with self-defense or food in mind, but to protect our right to political dissent. The United States of America was originated by an American Revolution in which the citizens of the original 13 colonies formed a militia and fought against their tyrannical government to eventually form the advanced society of today. The original writers of the constitution wanted the American citizens to hold the same right to overthrow the United State’s tyrannical government if the situation ever arises. To give up the right to political dissent is to repeat history.

 

Works Cited

“Locke ‘N Load: John Locke d YOUR Second Amendment Rights.” Intro to Political Theory Blog. Sabalaba, 24 Nov. 2009. Web. 13 Nov. 2016.

Ghost Guns. Perf. Anonymous Performers. Underworld Inc. National Geographic Network, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2016. 

“Assault Weapon Truth: The Facts about Assault Weapons.” Assaultweapontruth. Assault Weapon Truth, n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2016. <http://www.assaultweapontruth.com>.

Lott, John R., Jr. More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws. Chicago, and London: U of Chicago, 2010. Print.

Lott, John R., Jr. The Bias Against Guns: Why Almost Everything You’ve Heard About Gun Control Is Wrong. Washington DC: Regnery, 2003. Print.

Jacobs, James B. “The Value of Firearms.” Can Gun Control Work? Oxford: Oxford U, 2002. 14-16. Print.

Reflective Rewrite- theshocker69

Core Value I. My work demonstrates that I used a variety of social and interactive practices that involve recursive stages of exploration, discovery, conceptualization, and development.

One of the largest lessons that I have taken away from college composition is the recursive, never-ending cycle of good writing. Good writing is never finished. Last year in comp, I learned a great deal about proofreading. But yet, this semester I have learned more about changing my work than ever before. Every assignment this semester has been thoughtfully proofread and edited, but real revision began during my Visual Rewrites. The first moving image assignment was enjoyable, which made revision a fun recursive process. At the beginning of the semester, I struggled with revision, but we learned more tools to aid us in our revision towards the end of the semester which helped me greatly.

Not only are recursive stages of revision dire for great writing, but recursive discovery for the topic you are writing about is just as important. Without a broad knowledge of what you will be writing about, your writing will not be great. I was sure to create a legitimate interest in topics discoursed during class to make better writing. Informative writing creates curiosity within the reader, that becomes possible when the writer educates themselves on their subject of discourse. Further, lack of knowledge in your topic of writing will result in a bored audience. Gun control has always been a topic of discourse within my family which has resulted in a genuine interest on the problem. Therefore, gun control was the ideal research topic for me.

Core Value II. My work demonstrates that I placed texts into conversation with one another to create meaning by synthesizing ideas from various discourse communities.

By sorting all of our composition work into an online blog, a large platform that allows for a large community for discourse amongst various topics has been created. In my writing I was allowed discourse between my professor and I in order to improve my writing, as well as discourse amongst my fellow anonymous students. By receiving anonymous discourse from other students in my class, I am able to analyze a diverse view separate from my own that has helped tremendously in preparation for my research paper. And by forcing anonymity, this creates a bias barrier that encourages honest, although sometimes brutal, criticism that acts as a motivator towards the student to improve their writing in their recursive stages.

Throughout the semester, I have received large amounts of feedback from my professor and even a fair share from my peers. On my Definition Argument assignment, Darnell18 commented at me, “I like how you cover details on a variety of guns. The subject matter is very informative”. This dialogue between my audience and I helps me better understand what the audience wants to hear.

Core Value III. My work demonstrates that I rhetorically analyzed the purpose, audience, and contexts of my own writing and other texts and visual arguments.

In writing for my Research paper, I provided readers of the blog with unbiased and accurate information. Nowadays, it is challenging to find unbiased information. In response, I made a mission to supply that to the readers of the blog. In doing this, I was sure to search for observational data as opposed to subjective analysis. Subjective information is unreliable and strays from the work I am attempting to provide. By rhetorically analyzing the purpose, audience, and contents of my writing, I was able to provide accurate information effectively to the readers of the website.

Core Value IV: My work demonstrates that I have met the expectations of academic writing by locating, evaluating, and incorporating illustrations and evidence to support my own ideas and interpretations.

Without a premise, a conclusion has no meaning. Illustrations and evidence are of dire importance to support the writer’s ideas and deductions. As stated before, I wanted to deliver unbiased, accurate information to the readers. Therefore, I limited my sources to unbiased electronic web pages and documentaries in order to receive the most precise information as possible. I was sure to evaluate each website before it’s use to be sure that it’s facts and data were accurate and true, and that each website lacked subjective observation as to avoid such data to achieve my composition goal.

My annotated bibliography is a direct representation of the sources I located and evaluated, and also explains how I incorporated illustrations and evidence to support my own ideas and conclusions.

Core Value V. My work demonstrates that I respect my ethical responsibility to represent complex ideas fairly and to the sources of my information with appropriate citation.

“My worthy opponent is wrong.” This quote told to us in class sticks out in my head with every argumentative paper I write. In class I learned the importance to be civil in our rebuttal arguments, and to respect our opponent, but to crush them in our knowledge and compositional skills. My work demonstrates this by showing that general knowledge is generally wrong, respectfully. My work also politely attempts to prove that our perceptions are not to be trusted, and that observational data is our key to advancement as a society.

Further, I learned the ethical responsibility of providing accurate citation to show respect for the sources that made my writing what it is. Without proper citation, the advancement of knowledge is halted because the validity of the information will be questionable.

Reflective-theshocker69

 

Core Value I. My work demonstrates that I used a variety of social and interactive practices that involve recursive stages of exploration, discovery, conceptualization, and development.

One of the largest lessons that I have taken away from college composition is that writing is a recursive, never-ending mission. Good writing is never finished. Last year in comp, I learned a great deal about proofreading. But yet, this semester I have learned more about changing my work than ever before. Every assignment this semester has been thoughtfully proofread and edited. At the beginning of the semester, I struggled with revision, but we learned more tools to aid us in our revision towards the end of the semester which helped me greatly.

Not only are recursive stages of revision dire for great writing, but recursive discovery for the topic you are writing about is just as important. Without a broad knowledge of what you will be writing about, your writing will not be great. I was sure to create a legitimate interest in topics discoursed during class to make better writing. Informative writing creates curiosity within the reader, that is only possible when the writer is educated on their subject of discourse.

Core Value II. My work demonstrates that I placed texts into conversation with one another to create meaning by synthesizing ideas from various discourse communities.

By sorting all of our composition work into an online blog, a large platform that allows for a large community for discourse amongst various topics has been created. In my writing I was allowed discourse between my professor and I in order to improve my writing, as well as discourse amongst my fellow anonymous students. By receiving anonymous discourse from other students in my class, I am able to analyze a diverse view separate from my own that has helped tremendously in preparation for my research paper. And by forcing anonymity, this creates a bias barrier that encourages honest, although sometimes brutal, criticism that acts as a motivator towards the student to improve their writing in their recursive stages.

Core Value III. My work demonstrates that I rhetorically analyzed the purpose, audience, and contexts of my own writing and other texts and visual arguments.

In my writing, I provided readers of the blog with unbiased and accurate information. Nowadays, it is challenging to find unbiased information. In response, I made a mission to supply that to the readers of the blog. In doing this, I was sure to search for observational data as opposed to subjective analysis. Subjective information is unreliable and strays from the work I am attempting to provide. By rhetorically analyzing the purpose, audience, and contents of my writing, I was able to provide accurate information effectively to the readers of the website.

Core Value IV: My work demonstrates that I have met the expectations of academic writing by locating, evaluating, and incorporating illustrations and evidence to support my own ideas and interpretations.

Without a premise, a conclusion has no meaning. Illustrations and evidence are of dire importance to support the writer’s ideas and deductions. As stated before, I wanted to deliver unbiased, accurate information to the readers. Therefore, I limited my sources to unbiased electronic web pages and documentaries in order to receive the most precise information as possible. I was sure to evaluate each website before it’s use to be sure that it’s facts and data were accurate and true, and that each website lacked subjective observation as to avoid such data to achieve my composition goal.

Core Value V. My work demonstrates that I respect my ethical responsibility to represent complex ideas fairly and to the sources of my information with appropriate citation.

“My worthy opponent is wrong.” This quote told to us in class sticks out in my head with every argumentative paper I right. In class I learned the importance to be civil in our arguments, and to respect our opponent, but to crush them in our knowledge and compositional skills. My work demonstrates this by showing that general knowledge is generally wrong, respectfully. My work also politely attempts to prove that our perceptions are not to be trusted, and that observational data is our key to advancement as a society.

Further, I learned the ethical responsibility of providing accurate citation to show respect for the sources that made my writing what it is. Without proper citation, the advancement of knowledge is halted because the validity of the information will be questionable.

Bibliography- theshocker69

  1. “Jim Jefferies Has Got Gun Control All Wrong. • /r/progun.” Reddit. Therevenantrising, 20 June 2015. Web. 13 Nov. 2016. 

Background: This is an anonymous reddit user’s post regarding his opinions on Jim Jefferies’ view on gun control. Although social media may not be one of the most reliable sources on the internet, events and statistics listed here are facts

How I Used It: This source worked out great for me because I was already familiar with Jefferies’ performance, this post dissected almost each sentence from his presentation. This made my dissection of his show much easier since it was all organized so neatly on this page.

2. “List of Massacres in Australia.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2016.

Background: This source is simply a list of Massacres that have occurred in Australia all throughout it’s history.

How I used it: I used this source to find out exactly how many massacres have occurred since Australia’s gun ban. I was able to find the date of the original massacre that caused the gun ban, and the long line of massacres listed thereafter. This helped to prove my point that gun control is counterintuitive to common beliefs.

3. “Locke ‘N Load: John Locke d YOUR Second Amendment Rights.” Intro to Political Theory Blog. Sabalaba, 24 Nov. 2009. Web. 13 Nov. 2016.

Background: This web page was originally designed to convey philosopher John Locke’s view of gun control, the philosophical viewpoint of a firearm, and also to explain the need for firearms to defend against our government.

How I used it: I was able to use this source to have guns perceived in a light they are not usually viewed in. The comparison of a firearm to your natural right to defend yourself and your loved ones is not a straw man, it is an accurate representation. Further, the explanation of firearms as a natural right, given to us by nature, was able to help me further show my point

4. Ghost Guns. Perf. Anonymous Performers. Underworld Inc. National Geographic Network, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2016. 

Background: “Ghost Guns” is an episode of National Geographic’s, “Underworld Inc.” In this episode, the producers focused on the illegal gun trade, it’s traffic along our borders, and how it affects our society.

How I used it: This episode was very helpful to my paper. The show gave me so much information on how these guns are moved across our country. I learned more about the techniques that these cartels utilize in order to bring these illegal firearms across the border and I put that information in my paper.

5. “Assault Weapon Truth: The Facts about Assault Weapons.” Assaultweapontruth. Assault Weapon Truth, n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2016. <http://www.assaultweapontruth.com>.

Background: This website has all the information you could ever need on assault rifles, how they are organized, what constitutes an assault rifle, and even information on gun bans.

How I used it: I used this website to help me explain the legal definition of an assault weapon. I also learned how assault weapons are organized, the difference between an assault rifle and other guns, and I inserted this information into my paper.

Causal Rewrite-theshocker69

Gun Control Causes Gun Violence

The law does not prevent individuals from participating in heinous activities, they only allow governmental consequences if caught committing the crime. Although our government prohibits the manufacturing, use, and distribution of illegal narcotics, roughly 48.6% of criminals in prison are in for drug offenses. Although the goal of the War on Drugs was to end addiction rates, our society reaped the opposite results. If we were to seize the natural right of self defense from American families, it would not result in less violence, it would result in vulnerable targets.

In an attempt to remove guns from our streets, our government would be required to impose a nation-wide collection to remove guns from American houses. However, in America there are roughly 324 million citizens who own over 300 million guns. With only 1.1 million law enforcement officers, how could they be reasonably expected to remove these firearms? Not to mention all of the remote locations in which many citizens reside in. If a nation-wide collection was implemented, it is obvious that many guns will be left behind, leaving a massive threat for the American people.

Further, the border that America shares with Mexico is not secure enough for such a regulation. Currently, the Mexican drug cartel owns tunnels that burry beneath the border to make the smuggling of unregistered weapons and narcotics possible. These unregistered weapons consist of machine guns, pistols, assault rifles, and even grenades that are untraceable. If we were to somehow effectively eliminate all guns from our society, illegal firearms will still be bought by criminals, posing a large threat to the American people. This would result in vulnerable families and armed criminals, not a safe country to live in.

In the unlikely event that effective gun collection has passed, there will only be two types of people who will own guns: police officers, and criminals. After the purchase of an illegally-obtained firearm, a criminal will commit a crime. During the illegal situation, all of the citizens at risk are unable to defend themselves or those around them. The only people capable of defending others will be police officers, which take an average of 7 minutes to arrive to the scene of a crime. During those 7 crucial minutes, many terrible things could happen; but this easily preventable.

The idea of gun control is very appealing, after all, nobody likes gun crime. However, this does not mean that guns must be eliminated. In our society, guns have become a necessary-evil. Guns cause evil, but, they also prevent evil from hurting us and those we love. If guns never entered out society, we would be able to get by without them today, but for the fact that they now exist, guns are necessary to protect what is important to us.

Works Cited

Anonymous. “The Truth About Assault Weapons.” The Truth About Assault Weapons. Anonymous, n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2016. <http://www.assaultweapon.info&gt>;

“Assault Rifle.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2016.<http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_Rifle>

“Federal Assault Weapons Ban.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2016. <http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban&gt>;

“Assault Weapon Truth: The Facts about Assault Weapons.” Assaultweapontruth. Assault Weapon Truth, n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2016. <http://www.assaultweapontruth.com>.

Rebuttal Rewrite-theshocker69

The most widely-used argument for gun control holds that disarming our citizens, and taking away their right to a firearm will, in turn, end gun violence. The theory seems harmless- if the government incorporates and enforces gun laws in an attempt to end the sale and manufacturing of firearms, while also removing them from houses of American families will eliminate all guns from our society; preventing gun crime. However, this theory neglects many variables that play into the situation such as geographic location and culture. Although the idea is appealing upon hasty deliberation, the causal chain can take many darker paths.

In his Netflix original standup special, Jim Jefferies stated, “In Australia, we had guns. Right up until 1996. In 1996, Australia had the biggest massacre on Earth. It still hasn’t been beaten. Now, after that, they banned the guns. Now, in the 10 years before Port Arthur, there were 10 massacres. Since the gun ban in 1996, there hasn’t been a single massacre since… In Australia, we had the biggest massacre on Earth, and the Australian government went, ‘That’s it! No more guns!’ And we all went, ‘Yeah, all right, then. That seems fair enough, really.’Now, in America, you had the Sandy Hook massacre where little, tiny children died, and your government went, “Maybe… we’ll get rid of the big guns?’” Although this argument seems sound, Jefferies utilizes fallacious logic by comparing Australian citizens to American citizens.  Australia and America are two different countries (continents as well) that possess many cultures with varying beliefs, contrastive geological settings, and disparate political beliefs. Aside from the beliefs and feelings of individuals, Australia lacks the inflow of unregistered, illegally transported firearms as a result of an adjacent country. If the government took firearms away from American families, they would take away the citizen’s right to protect not only themselves, but their families from the criminals who purchase these illegally transported guns. Further, a fact check on Jefferies and his statement, “since the gun ban in 1996, there hasn’t been a single massacre:” at least twelve shootings that fit into the dictionary definition of massacre have occurred since the ban with countless other shootings, not to mention the increase in home invasions.

In 1971, the war on drugs began, a policy from the Nixon administration of which we are still feeling the negative results from. The main goal of the war on drugs was to drastically drop addiction and crime rates, spread the disastrous message of what drugs do to an individual, and most of all, eradicate addiction in America. However, the results were quite the opposite. Addiction rates skyrocketed, crime rates rose dramatically, and drug use is at an all time high not only for adults, but adolescents as well. Although drugs are illegal and punished so severely, people still choose to do them. It is only logical to believe that people will still buy guns even though it is illegal; through the black market. If guns were illegal to be owned, police would be the only ones fit to defend against a criminal. For that reason, if a criminal breaks into a family’s house, that family will be unable to defend themselves. Unfortunately, the family may wait up to an average of seven minutes before police arrive. The consequences of which could be fatal.

There are over 300 million guns in the US, compared to 324,118,787 American citizens. In what way could law enforcement, consisting of 1.1 million officers, remove so many guns, from so many families, in so many different locations?  In the case this somehow happened effectively, millions of families would be left without a chance to defend themselves, while a small demographic of our population owns a weapon; a threat to the rest of society.

By nature, no human needs a constitution granting them the right to defend themselves or their loved ones; a natural right. Second, the nullification of our second amendment cannot be warranted if there are actual uses for a firearm in a civil society.

Most of the citizens in Alaska own guns and utilize them for two things; food and defense. There is not much society within Alaska. There are very small amounts of roads, small amounts of people, and stores. Therefore, the people of Alaska must fend for themselves. Typically, the father of the house hunts to feed the family. Without their guns, the family cannot eat. To take away their right to a gun, because the rest of the country has the privilege to shop for food is inhumane. Also, even if our government were to include a clause that allowed the sale, use, and transfer of firearms in Alaska, that will be the new place where criminals can buy their guns and spread them across the country.

As one can see, the creation of the firearm began a catch-22 within the American culture. However, no matter your opinion of guns in our society, it must be admitted that guns do serve a function within our civil society. Yes, there is evil in this world, and the longer life goes on, the more apparent it is and there is nothing we may ever do to stop it, but American citizens must have the option to defend themselves. No matter your stance on the argument, a gun is protection, and no American needs a piece of paper to tell them they have the right to protect their life, liberty, happiness, and family.

Works Cited

“Jim Jefferies Has Got Gun Control All Wrong. • /r/progun.” Reddit. Therevenantrising, 20 June 2015. Web. 13 Nov. 2016. 

“List of Massacres in Australia.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2016.

“Locke ‘N Load: John Locke and YOUR Second Amendment Rights.” Intro to Political Theory Blog. Sabalaba, 24 Nov. 2009. Web. 13 Nov. 2016.

Ghost Guns. Perf. Anonymous Performers. Underworld Inc. National Geographic Network, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2016. 

Definition Rewrite-theshocker69

“Assault Weapons”

People love to use the word assault weapon. Reporters utilize the phrase as a buzzword, to deliver fear into your heart and the hearts of your loved ones. The word gets tossed around during debates as if nobody really knows the definition of an assault weapon. What exactly constitutes an “assault weapon”?

First we need to define the term assault rifle. An assault rifle can only be a selective-fire weapon that utilizes an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine. To fall into this category, a firearm must be capable of selective fire, have an intermediate-power cartridge with more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle. Its ammunition must come from a detachable box magazine, and have an effective range of at least 110 feet. Any weapon that does not meet all of these requirements may not be considered an assault rifle.

Making matters even more confusing, legislation coined the term “Assault weapon” in an attempt to rush the idea of fear into certain firearms. Bruce Kobayashi and Joseph E. Olson explain, “Prior to 1989, the term ‘assault weapon’ did not exist in the lexicon of firearms. It is a political term, developed by anti-gun publicists to expand the category of ‘assault rifles.’” Assault weapons are usually defined as semi-automatic (one shot per pull of the trigger) firearms that utilize attachments commonly assumed to be affiliated with military firearms. A firearm may only be considered an assault weapon if it reflects a rifle type weapon, fires semi-automatic, has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and two of the following; folding/telescoping stock, a pistol grip beneath the action of the weapon, a bayonet mount, flash suppressor/ threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor, a grenade launcher.

Automatic firearms are also called machine guns which were made illegal to sell or transfer in 1986 under federal law. A machine gun can only be a fully automatic, mounted, or portable firearm such as the M4A1 Carbine. A machine gun rate of fire varies from 300 to 1800 bullets every minute. Machine guns are then sub-divided further as submachine guns, assault rifles, battle rifles, automatic shotguns, or autocannons. This information proves useful to expose the differences between (so-called) assault weapons, assault rifles, and a typical machine gun.

The Colt AR-15 has no choice but to fire one bullet per pull of the trigger; for this reason, the rate of fire proves much slower than the M4A1 does with only 45 rounds per minute which is comparable to all other semi automatic rifles. David Kopel explains in the Wall Street Journal, “What some people call ‘assault weapons’ function like every other normal firearm- they fire only one bullet each time the trigger is pressed… Some of these guns look like machine guns, but they do not function like machine guns.” Through his words, Kopel stresses the fact that weapons such as the AR-15 functions just as a typical hunting rifle does, and does not hold the ability to induce the damage that an assault rifle will create.

Not only do “assault weapons” such as the AR-15 work just like a regular hunting rifle. They also work in a similar fashion to every other gun sold in America; shotguns, ranch guns, and even pistols. However, the design of the gun affects the perception of many citizens who do not know any better, which insights a stigma around them. According to a 1998 report by the Violence Policy Center, “The weapon’s menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons- anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun- can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.” A large portion of the population does not hold knowledge towards the subject of guns and do not understand the difference between the “menacing” AR-15 and any machine gun.

In 1989, after the Cleveland Elementary School shooting in Stockton California left thirty-two injured and five children dead, anti-gun lobbyists and the media began campaigning against AR-15’s and other “military style” firearms. This caused the public to believe that these ordinary rifles are as dangerous as fully automatic, militaristic, machine guns. The suspect, Patrick Purdy, used a semi-automatic weapon to fire 106 rounds in 180 seconds. Purdy then took his own life with a pistol; not an assault weapon. These numbers are easily recreated by all semi-automatic weapons, regardless of the aesthetics of the firearm. The number of dead and injured children would have skyrocketed had the gun been fully automatic because more shots would have been fired. Although semi-automatic weapons are undeniably dangerous, to govern some of them as illegal (although they each posses the same amount of power and danger) based off it’s appearance instead of its functionality is erroneous.

On September 13th 1994, Bill Clinton signed the Federal Assault Weapons Ban. The purpose of the assault weapons ban was to prohibit the manufacturing and civilian transfer, possession, or use of semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity magazines for ten years. The NRA (National Rifle Association) opposed the ban, stating, “‘Assault weapons’ are used in only one percent of all crimes,” which was then proven by the Department of Justice’s crime statistics in 1999. The ban also penalized the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices. These devices are defined in the act as, “any magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device manufactured after [September 13, 1994] that has the capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition,” which sounds absurd upon realization that many guns typically take more than ten bullets. However, the Assault Weapons Ban incorporated a grandfather clause which declares that possession or transfer of weapons or ammunition that was possessed lawfully before the date of enactment will not be punished. This means that while the manufacturing of these guns have ended, the same amount of these weapons are still on the streets within the hands of people; still capable of abuse.

As one can see, an “Assault Weapon” does not differ from it’s semiautomatic counterparts. Although they may seem intimidating compared to other guns on the market, they do not function differently. A pistol that just missed the classification may be just as dangerous as any assault weapon. To conclude the assumption that they are more dangerous to our society followed by attempts to remove them from the hands of families requiring protection may be the most illogical and frightening portion of the situation. Our government means well, which makes this situation counterintuitive.

Works Cited

Anonymous. “The Truth About Assault Weapons.” The Truth About Assault Weapons. Anonymous, n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2016. <http://www.assaultweapon.info&gt>;

“Assault Rifle.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2016.<http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_Rifle>

“Federal Assault Weapons Ban.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2016. <http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban&gt>;

“Assault Weapon Truth: The Facts about Assault Weapons.” Assaultweapontruth. Assault Weapon Truth, n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2016. <http://www.assaultweapontruth.com>.

Robust Verbs-theshocker69

There is a massive problem in Vancouver with heroin addicts committing crimes to support their habits. The “Free Heroin for Addicts” program is doing everything they can to help the addicts. As a result of addiction, there has been sky-high crime rates. Obviously, addicts have a harder time getting through their day to day lives as apposed to the normal citizen. Daily activities such as work, interactions, and relationships are hard to maintain because of their drug use. Thanks to their addiction, they will do anything for their fix. Breaking and entering, along with stealing, are among the type of crimes committed. There is no limit to how far an addict will go to feed their addiction. However, this program will not help addicts ween off of their drugs. All this will do is lower crime rate. Providing the drug will prevent minor street crime by taking the addicts off of the streets, while also keeping them out of the hospital. Now, hospitals must deal with drug addicts who cannot afford their medical bills, let alone function without their drug. This program gives addicts free heroin in the cleanest way possible, and it may help the city, but it will not cure the addict’s disease.

Enough About You-theshocker69

Money has such a large role in our society; nothing gets done without it. Money is valuable, even if it is not actually visible. In today’s society we must have faith in the government and in the banking system that our money is being handled in the proper manner, if not, we would have to hide all of our money under our mattresses or around the house. What happens inside the bank is a mystery, let alone how they they handle the money. Money is simple; we either have some or we don’t—that’s it. However, being introduced to this assignment, the Yap Fei, US gold, French francs, Brazilian cruzeros, and debit accounts now seem similar. Money transfer is not observable. On pay day, people aren’t handed cash, the money is all directly transferred to the bank account, and hopefully money actually resides inside the bank account.