Edward Abbey The Right To Arms Analysis
Lance Morrison
Professor Evans
Writing 021
3/6/09
Topic: Gun Control: Would it really help? “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns,” Edward Abbey argues in his essay, “The Right to Arms.” Many people are familiar with the expression, “Guns don’t kill people. People kill People.” I am a firm believer in this statement. A firearm is a controllable, unbiased, and uncorrupt object; a tool with multiple and important purposes. To discredit them because of their potential danger, when in the wrong hands, is illogical and strips Americans of their liberty and their right! There are many reasons to support the second Amendment. Aside from firearms being used in hunting, recreational activities, law enforcement, and the military, firearms provide the American citizens with a potential “safeguard against an over-bearing federal authority; one of our most vital checks and balances; a source, if need be, to overthrow usurpers” (debate …show more content…
I agree that it’s a good idea to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the unstable, who wouldn’t? However, we cannot be so sure that a restriction on firearm purchases will do this. In 1997, there was an incident in Dunblane, England, in which sixteen kids were shot. In response, the United Kingdom passed one of the strictest gun-control laws in the world, banning citizens from owning almost every type of hand gun (Stossel). The hope was to decrease the crime, but the exact opposite has happened. Since the ban was enacted, gun-related crime in the U.K. has nearly doubled. Nearly the same result occurred after the ban of handguns in Washington D.C. Since Washington’s gun law passed, its murder rate actually increased, even while America’s murder rate dropped” (
Professor Evans
Writing 021
3/6/09
Topic: Gun Control: Would it really help? “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns,” Edward Abbey argues in his essay, “The Right to Arms.” Many people are familiar with the expression, “Guns don’t kill people. People kill People.” I am a firm believer in this statement. A firearm is a controllable, unbiased, and uncorrupt object; a tool with multiple and important purposes. To discredit them because of their potential danger, when in the wrong hands, is illogical and strips Americans of their liberty and their right! There are many reasons to support the second Amendment. Aside from firearms being used in hunting, recreational activities, law enforcement, and the military, firearms provide the American citizens with a potential “safeguard against an over-bearing federal authority; one of our most vital checks and balances; a source, if need be, to overthrow usurpers” (debate …show more content…
I agree that it’s a good idea to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the unstable, who wouldn’t? However, we cannot be so sure that a restriction on firearm purchases will do this. In 1997, there was an incident in Dunblane, England, in which sixteen kids were shot. In response, the United Kingdom passed one of the strictest gun-control laws in the world, banning citizens from owning almost every type of hand gun (Stossel). The hope was to decrease the crime, but the exact opposite has happened. Since the ban was enacted, gun-related crime in the U.K. has nearly doubled. Nearly the same result occurred after the ban of handguns in Washington D.C. Since Washington’s gun law passed, its murder rate actually increased, even while America’s murder rate dropped” (