draft

Title

            After the loss of the beautiful children and adults at The Sandy Hook Shooting, there was a huge outcry from Americans all over about how we need to do something about the shootings in the U.S. There is no doubt that many innocent people are dying because of the use of guns. President Barak Obama spoke on this at his speech on Gun Control on January 16, 2013; President Obama believes that this proposal will help reduce the violence in the U.S and keep our family and friends safe from harm. But would restrictions on guns really reduce violence? Although The Gun Control proposal is a growing topic, not all agree that this proposal will lessen the killings in the U.S or that this proposal will even last. Tom Gresham, an editor of the Columbus Dispatch, disagrees with President Obama’s proposal on gun control. Tom believes that this proposal will be a failure because all of the other bans on assault weapons in the past failed. He believes that if we have more programs on how to secure firearms then that will help reduce killings. I agree with president Obama that we need to keep our family and friends safe from harm, but I oppose on the stricter gun control proposal. We need to own guns to protect ourselves and our love ones against criminals.

 President Obama believes that having a control on guns is what we need to help reduce violence. In his speech he immediately talks on the Sandy Hook Shooting and how we need to protect our children from harm. He bases his whole speech on protecting or children and loved ones to grab the listener’s attention and make them feel sad and upset. President Obama uses many fallacies when he gives his speech to help his argument. For an example, he uses many glittering generalizations throughout his speech, like when he says the words “free”, “together”. “Powerful”, he uses these words so that the listeners can accept and approve of his argument without examining his evidence. But did President Obama have any proof in his speech that banning guns will actually help reduce violence? Analyzing his speech President Obama states that, “it's time for Congress to require a universal background check for anyone trying to buy a gun. Right now, as many as 40 percent of all gun purchases are conducted without a background check.” Through research I found that on an article on University News Elizabeth Golden writes that, “According to a report by the Government Accountability Office, between 2004 and 2010, over 1,200 people on terrorist watch lists attempted to buy firearms and 91 percent of these transactions passed the background check.” (Elizabeth Golden) This statement goes against Obama because it’s saying that even if we have background checks there will still be criminals who can beat the system and find a way to get a hold on a gun. In Obama’s speech he didn’t state many creditably people to back up his arguments on having a control on guns. This made it harder to agree with Obama’s proposals because we don’t know any other person who sides with him.

On the other hand, On The Columbus Dispatch, an article called “Gun control has a clear record of failure” Tom Gresham's the author, has published an argument about how the Gun control proposal will result in a failure. In his article he explains several reasons why the proposal will be a failure; he also states ways we can help reduce the violence in the U.S. According to Tom, “The National Academy of Sciences studied gun laws in the U.S. and reported it could find no link between restrictions on gun ownership and lower rates of crime, firearms violence or accidents with guns.” He also states that “The major change in America's gun laws over the past two decades is removing prohibitions against people carrying guns for protection” Even though these are great claims, Tom failed to have credibly citations in his article. If he would have cited a scientist or cited a FBI then the reader can feel like his statement was well supported. Through research I found an article called The Case for more Guns (And more Gun Control) by Jeffery Goldberg stating that, “Pink Pistol clubs sprang up across America, in which gays and lesbians learn to use firearms in self-defense. Other vulnerable groups have also taken to the idea of concealed carry: in Texas, African American women represent the largest percentage increase of concealed-carry permit seekers since 2000.” This quote supports Tom’s statement on how allowing people to carry guns for protection helps people with self-defense.

Tom Gresham also writes on child education on guns. He explains that if we had more programs like the Eddie Eagle program, which teaches young children to not to touch guns and to tell an adult if they see one then this will decrease the accidents on handling guns. He also states in his article that, “Congress eliminated the funding for “Project Childsafe,” a program created by the firearms industry to educate gun owners about safe storage and to distribute millions of gun locks.” Tom’s statements on how we need more programs that help educate young children is extremely useful because it sheds light on the serious problem on how to stay away from guns and to properly handle a gun.

In any case, both authors agree, and so do I, that we do need to do something to help with the issue on guns. I believe that we shouldn’t have a ban on guns. I believe that all Americans have the right to own a gun for protection or even for hunting. Although I agree with President Obama that we need to have stricter background checks for purchasing guns, I also agree with Tom Gresham on how we need to have more programs for children on teaching them about the dangers of guns.