Chur english 1301 12 november 2009 molly ivins and her crazy gun theory molly ivins. But get rid of guns, argues for an absolute abolition of civilian gun ownership. ivins begins her argument with a sarcastic attitude. This article discusses what is perhaps the greatest source of contention in the entire debate: the second amendment’s wording.

Dissertation Writing Vocabulary

The author quotes former supreme court justice john paul stevens, who advocates changing the second amendment’s confusing language to clarify that it only applies to those serving in a militia. This is a good place to start because the second amendment is pretty much the cornerstone of the whole debate, and the modification that stevens suggests highlights the fact that the second amendment refers to an armed citizen militia, not individual gun ownership. Gun control and the constitution: should we amend the second amendment? bloomberg business week.

This electronic reprint of a blog by susan milligan, a frequent contributor to us news. Discusses an important aspect of the gun control issue: namely that many of the worst acts of gun violence are committed by people who have never violated the law before. She mentions that one of the most frequently used arguments against gun control is that such acts are committed by criminals anyway, so criminalizing ownership of a gun wouldn’t make any real difference. She points out that when someone just snaps and has a gun handy, it can make matters much worse than if guns weren’t so easily accessible.

Essay on Laughter Is The Best Medicine

This is an in depth discussion of the meaning of existing gun laws and the second amendment, the difference between now and the time in which the amendment was drafted, and how the drastically increased killing power of modern firearms makes any reference to the laws crafted two centuries ago obsolete. This well researched article was written in the aftermath of the trayvon martin shooting. Lepore is a frequent contributor to the new yorker as well as many other national news magazines.

Should guns be regulated? this has been questioned by society for generations, and will be for many to come. Molly ivins gives her opinion on the issue in her argument get a knife, get a dog, but get rid of guns. This well stated argument gives many details about why the use of guns should be banned. The discussion begins with the writers opinion on guns, stating that she in fact, is not anti gun, but more of an advocate of the use of knives. The writer points out that knifes could become more of a positive alternative to the use of guns. She suggests that knives can not ricochet as do guns, and the fact that people are less likely to be killed cleaning their knife as they would be cleaning a gun. The argument then takes a turn into the author's views to why guns should not be allowed and how they are destroying the security of our society.

The writer uses cars as a metaphor to guns signifying that cars are a deadly object as are guns, but cars are subject to only those who are licensed to them and a certain assembly of people are allowed to purchase them. She proposes that the same restrictions should be placed on those who want to purchase a gun. Ivins uses many valid and essential points in this argument to prove her opinion that guns should not be a part of our society. She points out the argument weather guns don't kill people вќ 404 and believes that this is a false statement in support of her side of the argument. She also discusses how family arguments length: 1443 words 4.1 double spaced pages rating: red free many stories like the following occur, but are hardly every published: three robbers entered a commerce city, colo. The two men and a woman apparently had planned to rob an acquaintance: but the homeowner resisted the threat, drawing his semiautomatic handgun and shooting the two men. As soon as they get out of the hospital, we'll be there to meet and greet them, said sgt.

Rifleman these are two of many different stories that are produced monthly by the magazine american rifleman. There are many people who believe that a handgun can save your life, but there also people who believe that they are just used for bad guys to kill. The constitution states that we have the right to keep and bare arms, but there are some groups that have decided that is not right. The law states that you can not buy a gun at a gun show without a background check, and for it to be a gun show there only needs to be 3 or more people. So, in other words many of the police officers in the world will now be breaking the law when the switch guns with other officers. For instance, there are four officers standing around at the police station, and a couple of them decided to try out each others gun for a day or two.

The nra and many other pro gun groups did everything they could try and make sense of it to people. Sarah brady, chair of handgun control, inc, was quoted when she said, these two overwhelming victories clearly demonstrate that all americans, including gun owners, support responsible gun laws which keep criminals from buying guns. This statement which was publicized in a news release, is a complete hasty generalization. Just because this law was passed, doesn't mean that every person, even gun owners want more laws.

How Do Transitions Help With The Flow of An Academic Paper Do Certain Transitions Affect The Main

Just because handguns are going to be harder for the normal person to obtain, doesn't mean that it will be harder for criminals to get them. A report done by cops, the true stories of police officers, says that no matter what is done with gun laws, it doesn't stop criminals. One of the men that was arrested said that it would only take him 20 minutes to go out and by a gun off the streets. So, by saying that the new law on gun show loophole will stop criminals from getting guns could not be farther from the truth.