Gun Control

Gun Control

Dylan Stewart

Sterling High School

Abstract
Gun Control
2

This essay is more than just a statement, more than just a point of view. It is a factual

representation of guns, to show how safe they really are in the right hands. Hunting wise, guns

are the essential, they are used not only as a sporting gun, but a way of life. Hunting isn’t just

about shooting the biggest buck with the biggest rack, it's about getting the meat and furs to feed.

Than there is the other point, self defense, saving lives and preventing furthermore hurt. The

facts are all out there, disappointing to some, satisfying for most. Violence isn’t always the

answer, but in a crisis between America and any of the enemy, violence is the last resort, but it is

also used very often, weather it is scaring other countries, or ending their hatred. Keeping the bad

away from guns, high risk people not owning guns, and how to keep those guns out of so called

hands. Guns may not be the answer to every problem, but it is certainly a right to the people, for

the people.

I. Introduction- In this paper I am going to talk about how gun control isn’t very necessary,
considering the amount of damage they can pack, never should a gun kill someone, a
premeditated person with a gun though will kill someone.
II. Sub Topic- Hunting
Gun Control
3

A. Hunting is more than shooting an animal.

1. People hunt animals for food.
2. People hunt to assure gun safety
B. People hunt for sporting.
1. Skeet shooting is popular with shotguns.
2. Hunting a big game animal for a prize.
C. People hunt to survive
1. Without hunting and harvesting animals we would have to rely on factories.
2. People also use furs, and bones from animals for different uses.
III. Self security
A. When no law authority is around
1. If a crime is going down, you may be able to put the criminal under citizens
arrest.
2. You would be saving lives.
B. If an individual attacks you with lethal force
1. Sometimes waiting for a officer could take too long.
2. To have a gun, knowing you are safe an secure when nobody is around.
IV. Protecting our nation
A. If we were at war
1. The enemies will have guns, we need them too.
2. The world would be even more of a disaster without guns.
B. - If any terrorist attack happens in the US
1. We would be sitting ducks if we were attacked at home.
2. Our country would be taken over.
V. Conclusion

Pros and Cons of Hunting

According to Pros and Cons of Hunting; While there are many cons for hunting, there are

also a lot of pros. One of those pros is that hunting can sustain life. For a large amount of people,

if they don’t hunt, they don’t eat. They may not be able to obtain any other source of food or they
Gun Control
4

just can’t afford it. Another pro is that hunting can teach people an increased knowledge of the

outdoors and how to survive. If a person gets lost somewhere in the outdoors, a background of

hunting could help that person stay alive. One of the most important pros is that it is one of the

last remaining means of population control. If nobody hunted in the whole country, animal

populations would be running rampant and there would be a huge clash for land to live on

between humans and animals.

While hunting is seen as inhumane, it is used for more than shooting an animal, it is for

feeding the less fortunate who cannot afford to buy their own meat. Also the furs are harvested

from the animals hunted. Like said population control of the wild animals would get out of

control without hunting, and or the population of animals would cease to exist without control

over them. A con most people will see about guns is that the mean of them is to only do harm,

but without the gun the hunt for food and will to survive slims down.

Self-Defense, Punishment and Forfeiture

Self defence is a means for survival, whether hands, knifes, or a gun is used. According

to (Los Angeles Times) This is also a nation in which, in 2012, there were 1.2 million violent

crimes, defined as murder, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault. Or, put another way,

1.2 million scenarios in which there was potential for someone to kill in self-defense. Meaning

the incidents where a gun could be used for self security, wasn't used, and that the countless

times where innocent women and children who are assaulted could have and would have

prevented crimes against them with the means of using a gun. According to the self-defense

view, the moral justification of punishment is derived from the moral justification of an earlier

threat of punishment for an offense. According to the forfeiture view, criminals can justly be

punished because they have forfeited certain rights in virtue of their crimes( David Alm). Where
Gun Control
5

does it fit where it is morally right to use a gun? In many cases a person who is being attacked

could use violence to fight violence, but morals get into the way. Another point to where deadly

action could be used is if the reasoning is good enough, rationality takes a toll on it. There is also

another way to move around this issue, if there is no fair warning that so called person is about to

use deadly force to prevent any crimes or for them to be a victim.

Guns: The U.S. Threat to Mexican National Security

Many problems start with the smuggling of guns, not knowing where the guns come

from, or just simply not knowing how to stop the illegal guns from coming in. In a strange case

of role reversal, Mexican officials are increasingly taking the United States to task for failing to

stop the guns from entering their national territory— (Weinberg). While guns that are

confiscated at the border may not be used for crimes, they are still a growing problem to the

people’s minds. Guns are seen as bad from all sorts of different angels, but looking at them in a

good way is hard for some to understand.

Background Checks for all Gun Buyers and Gun Violence Restraining Orders: State

Efforts to

Keep Guns from High-Risk Persons.

Many assassinations, and crimes would have been stopped with background checks on

the higher risk people. The crucial contribution that background checks make to public safety

and health plays out across the country as people prohibited from purchasing firearms, who

would have failed background checks at licensed gun dealers, are nevertheless able to buy

firearms from unlicensed sellers and then perpetrate crimes (Jon S. Vernick, Ted Alcorn, and

Joshua Horwitz). Safety is the number one priority when handling deadly weapons, laws take
Gun Control
6

that a step further with background checks, and specific permits to keep the high risk people out

of reach of these weapons.

FOREWORD: THE PAST AND FUTURE OF GUNS

While the Second Amendment was under consideration, some commentators referred to

it as an individual right to be exercised outside of a militia, and after it was adopted, other writers

also referred to it as protecting more than a militia-based right (James Lindgren). Standing alone

in the fight of the second amendment being constitutional, and not going against the founders of

the United States. The right of the people to bear arms, and use them freely while having laws on

guns, on what guns are able to be used for.

Background of the Issue

Guns were common in the American Colonies, first for hunting and general self-

protection and later as weapons in the American Revolutionary War. Several colonies' gun laws

required that heads of households (including women) own guns and that all able-bodied men

enroll in the militia and carry personal firearms (P.ed). Firearms are a privilege that can be

revoked in the United States. Until further obligations to destroy the privilege, the guns in

America are here to stay, furthermore gun regulations are and will be made to help general

safety.
Gun Control
7

References

Pitte, M. V. (2003, April 29). The Moral Basis for Public Policy Encouraging Sport Hunting.

Retrieved April 29, 2018, from

http://web.b.ebscohost.com/src_ic/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=3&sid=7f24e42a-f1fb-4e4b-

8c0d-3ea53a72565d@sessionmgr102

Pros and Cons of Hunting. (2012, January/February). Retrieved April 29, 2018, from

http://www.hudson.edu/custom_users/mmtech/16893/16893/Pros_and_Cons.html
Gun Control
8

Alm, D. (2013, August 1). Self-Defense, Punishment and Forfeiture. Retrieved April 29, 2018,

from

http://web.b.ebscohost.com/src_ic/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=9&sid=7f24e42a-f1fb-4e4b-

8c0d-3ea53a72565d@sessionmgr102

Just Facts. (2016, April/May). Retrieved April 29, 2018, from

https://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

Background Checks for all Gun Buyers and Gun Violence Restraining Orders: State Efforts to

Keep Guns from High-Risk Persons. (2017, June 4). Jon S. Vernick, Ted Alcorn, and

Joshua Horwitz. from

http://web.b.ebscohost.com/src_ic/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=10&sid=796403e7-9a89-44

80-a0d2-3c6f3a673bce%40sessionmgr102

Weinberg, B. (2008, March). Guns: The U.S. Threat to Mexican National Security. Retrieved

April 30, 2018, from

http://web.a.ebscohost.com/src_ic/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=8&sid=e2c8c779-ba80-

4c4b-9c4f-330abca35f76@sessionmgr4008

Martelle, S. (2015, June 19). Gun and self-defense statistics that might surprise you -- and

the NRA. Retrieved April 30, 2018, from

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-guns-self-defense-charleston-20

150619-story.html
Gun Control
9

P. (Ed.). (2016, August 2). Background of the Issue - Gun Control - ProCon.org.

Retrieved April 30, 2018, from

https://gun-control.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=006436

Dylan Stewart
My research paper will be about gun control, and how we need less restrictions.

Bibliography

Adams. (2007, October 05). Gun Control Pros and Cons. Big Bang. Retrieved December 17,
2017, from http://web.b.ebscohost.com/src_ic/detail/detail?vid=12&sid=c573b339-f845-40e8-
8b26-
d3b09af671db%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9c3JjX2ljLWxpdmU%3d#AN=9159249&d
b=n9h

Guns can both save lives and reduce crime rate, but it has to be done a specific way, which may
involve safety classes. Many people see guns as their way of protection and freedom from other
laws. Even if there is no attack on someones home, just the thought of them having that
protection by their side puts them to sleep at night. It's either that or wait 10 minutes for the cops
to show up, but even that could be too late.

This just makes another point that gun control isn’t a very good idea, just for the consideration of
those people at home when an attacker comes in and tries to hurt them, Those people have a gun
Gun Control
10

for self defence, and even if there never comes a time those people need to discharge the weapon
it's to make a cushion of safety. Guns can be seen as something a bad guy used, but in the right
hand a weapon is just another method of self defence for when the cops can’t get there soon
enough, it's more used as a last resort.

Alexander, L. %. (2013, December 09). Gun Control. Retrieved December 17, 2017, from
http://web.b.ebscohost.com/src_ic/detail/detail?vid=9&sid=c573b339-f845-40e8-8b26-
d3b09af671db%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9c3JjX2ljLWxpdmU%3d#AN=89158206&
db=t6o

The big debate over gun control isn’t just the people in the world, it is also a huge part of
political talk. While there is always two sides to every story, gun control can have multiple, it
isn't just who shot the gun, it's where the gun came from, what bullet, and was it a legal gun. You
can point fingers all you want when it comes to guns, but the second amendment will shut up the
protest real quick, there isn’t much you can do or say about an already legal document, and
mostly one of the amendments.

By backing up my statement on a legal note, it makes my claim so much better. It would take
very many years to shut down something like guns, but the crime that guns “make” is
inadequate. Because guns aren’t the real problem here, it's the people who are able to obtain a
gun, anyone can obtain a gun, but not everyone can get a gun legally.

Falco, C. D. (2016, May 06). Gun control laws the biggest con job in our nation’s history.
Retrieved December 17, 2017, from
http://web.b.ebscohost.com/src_ic/detail/detail?vid=8&sid=c573b339-f845-40e8-8b26-
d3b09af671db%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9c3JjX2ljLWxpdmU%3d#AN=9X9MERN
EWSMMGLSTRY000151928325&db=n5h

Gun control isn’t necessarily to problem, in most of all cases guns aren’t an issue. Guns don’t
kill people, people with guns kill people. Trying to blame a gun for hurting or killing a person is
pointless, because guns can’t just load itself, cock itself and aim and pull its own trigger. People
only see the gun in any instance, they don’t see the health problems with the people shooting, or
the drugs they used. In Australia 93 percent of murders involved a unlicensed gun and
perpetrator. So do you really think putting a gun ban in the world would stop killings?

This helped my case because it shows that even if there was gun restrictions, they wouldn't stop
crime, they would actually boost crimes, because making something illegal when billions of
people own them. This article proved that people who have a registered firearm may still have a
chance of committing another crime with them but not as much as when the gun isn't licensed.
Gun Control
11

Knitt, R. (2104, May 18). Jewelry Design on Target. Retrieved December 17, 2017, from
http://web.b.ebscohost.com/src_ic/detail/detail?vid=17&sid=c573b339-f845-40e8-8b26-
d3b09af671db%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9c3JjX2ljLWxpdmU%3d#AN=2W6444446
000&db=n5h

Normally when you see jewelry in a gun control article you would think it is some random
clickbait. But for this instance the guns were used to make this jewelry, this company uses the
shell casings from a guns bullets to make into fine arts. And they also are putting part of their
monthly profit to charity that supports guns.

Without guns it would kill many businesses, and what would we do if our own military stopped
using guns as well, because you already know that the enemies aren't going to give up their guns.
Guns aren’t a bad thing, they help out America by taxing guns, and by also making the consumer
to buy special permits. This helped out my reasoning because it just showed a first person
account that if we took guns away by banning them, than millions of businesses would fail and
people would start losing jobs.

McCarthy, O. (2013, January 19). WNY politicians are moving targets in wake of gun control.
Retrieved December 17, 2017, from
http://web.b.ebscohost.com/src_ic/detail/detail?vid=18&sid=c573b339-f845-40e8-8b26-
d3b09af671db%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9c3JjX2ljLWxpdmU%3d#AN=2W6113171
947&db=n5h

The federal government has no say to what responsible gun owner do with their guns, not do that
have the right to take away guns, or to blame those responsible gun owners for some tragedies.
Most people who have been around guns in the U.S. have learned all about gun safety from
someone, and we've all heard treat every gun as a real one or treat it as if it were loaded.

This article helped my statement because it just shows that you can’t baby our every move and
you got to let us fly. But I would have to agree with some cases like doing a background check
on someone before they legally purchase a gun, just for the safety of the people they are around
if they were to have mental issues.

Bibliography

Patrick Beach.(2003).THE NEED TO KNOW; 40 YEARS AFTER JFK ASSASSINATION,

CONSPIRACY THEORIES HOLD SWAY. Waterloo, ON: Patrick Beach on JFK conspiracy
theories.
Gun Control
12

John F. Kennedy was assassinated by a single man alone. How could a man by himself
single handedly take down the highest up person down in the world with a cheap sniper rifle? All
of the bodyguards came out and said that the president would be too friendly and wasn’t very
cautious about people attacking him. Could that just be the government trying to cover up some
unwanted heat. Many people thought their own opinions on how the president may have been
killed,one of the most common answers would be that there was a secondary shooter, not just
Oswald himself.
This article over JFK and the conspiracies of his assassination will help this research
paper very well, considering it all being theory. When it comes down to a murder, you usually
only hear about a theory when it hasn’t been solved, but in this case they didn’t tell the public
about what officially happened.

Paul Monk.(2013). Stuffing up the mother of all JFK conspiracy theories. Melbourne: Paul on
the smoking gun.
For the second time there is the theory of the secret service man who accidentally
discharges a round into the president’s skull. When he was pulling out his weapon the firing pin
went off and the gunshot, hitting the president in the back of the head, while throwing the agent
back in surprise that the gun shot off. While not doing it on purpose, the government did a good
job keeping it all secret due to one of the president's own personal agent killing him.
It is better to have two different sources that say the exact same thing, and can back one
another up. Both this and another article said the exact same smoking gun theory. The agent with
the misfired weapon. This was very helpful for it was partial factual, and a good cooperation
with another story.

Selwyn Crawford.(1999). Former JFK aide discusses assassination, rejects conspiracy theories.
Dallas, TX: Selwyn on rejecting conspiracy.
Malcolm Kilduff, was only two cars behind the president when he was shot. He said that
he didn’t believe in any conspiracy because he lived it, unlike most people who have only heard
of it. After the shots rang out striking the president, he looked up and saw the open window. The
only reason people are making theories on how it happened was simply because it's mind
boggling that a single man alone can take down the most powerful man in the nation. People
don’t want it to seem that easy to assassinate the President of the United States.
This helped tremendously, usually you don't get a primary source when you are looking
up information, but Malcolm was there, and he experienced it, nothing can beat that. He was also
a very well-known man, and is very trustworthy. If you have a case you are trying to prove, and
you have a interview between the president's close friend, it helps out your case.

Tavis Smiley.(2003). Judge Joe Brown discusses the conspiracy theories surrounding the
assassination of JFK. Tavis Smiley on JFK conspiracy theories.
Gun Control
13

In the interview itself, the men talk about what they think happened, and what people
think are lies about the case, and other conspiracies. Also the person that is being interviewed is
a former jurist, who led a investigation in the 90’s. So the dude has been in one of these
situations a time or two in his past, as he says multiple times that it is like the MLK
assassination, or the Malcom X assassination as well. All of them connect in his eyes, once
someone in this world gets ahold of some power, and people to sit behind, they need to be
assassinated.
This interview helped me a lot, it wasn't as much the context, or even what all was said,
just the new viewpoints that were said. Also how he added in other cases that were similar to the
JFK assassination. It will help proving all of the conspiracies by joining them together.

Verne Gay.(2013).Reelz documentary touts recycled assassination conspiracy theory.

Melville,NY: Verne on new conspiracy.
Leading up to the 50th anniversary since the assassination of JFk, Verne saw that it is
very possible that the third and final shot that killed JFK could’ve been accidently shot by a
secret service man pulling out his gun and discharging a round into the back of the president’s
head. In video the agent falls back as he accidentally discharges his weapon and he falls back,
could this be how JFK died?
I found this very helpful, and unlike all of the other conspiracies, possible. It will help my
paper by putting in new information that hasn’t been heard by very many people. The real
question is, did that last shot come into contact with JFK?