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 handbook). Not only do they provide “vital checks and balances” (debate handbook) between the American citizens and the government, but they keep the American citizens in check amongst each other. A superficial look at this political predicament can be misleading. This is not a case where society is simply enjoying something and is, simultaneously, putting others at risk. We must take this scenario further, through research and close and analysis, and say, not only is it our right as Americans to keep and bear arms, but our responsibility and our duty as American citizens to exercise our power in government. Bronwyn Jones, in her essay, “Arming Myself with a Gun Is Not the Answer,” argues that guns, “like nuclear weapons, only ensure greater devastation when conflict breaks out or the inevitable human error occurs”(315). Well, in the heat of battle, one man doesn’t get sympathy for bringing a smaller stick. If any kind of a “conflict” or “human error” occurs, American citizens deserve to have a...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document