English 101 Final 1

Jackson 1

Eric Jackson Professor Granillo English 101 3/25/19 Gun Culture is Not A Culture of Violence Despite many mainstream objections, gun owners are responsible and law abiding citizens who don’t wish harm on others. While this is a conjecture that has been made recently with the growing intensity of the gun control argument, the issue itself dates back somewhat further into the 1980s and 90s with the creation of the assaults weapon ban. Much of the modern political upheaval, however, has been in response to an increased focus on mass shootings such as in Las Vegas and Stoneman Douglas High School. The arguments that many gun control and anti-gun advocates produce however tell half-truths and ignore underlying historical and cultural precedents for why gun ownership exists in America. While the call for universal background checks is a valid argument, the notion that nay specific gun should be banned ignores factual data to prove otherwise, constitutional and historical precedent, and the symbolic nature of losing such freedom. Therefore, we as a society must tackle the heart of such radical criminalization and not blame the tool they utilize nor others who own them. The signature data that many gun control advocates such as the Parkland survivors tout, is that mass shootings are rampant throughout the country and the AR-15 is the most common tool used. One parkland shooting survivor said in a speech at the March for Our Lives rally that the solution is universal background checks on gun sales and a ban on assault rifles (New York Times). The call to ban “assault” rifles, however, makes little logical sense. Of the roughly

Jackson 2

30,000 gun deaths that occur in the US every year (less than smoking and car related accidents), two-thirds of those deaths are suicides. Of the remaining number 80% of the deaths were caused by handguns while less than 1% were caused by “assault” rifles. The disproportionate data on the relevance of the AR-15 as the “tool of mass shooters” further demonstrates the misinformation being spread on this issue. In the end, is it logical for the U.S. to specifically target gun owners of AR-15 style rifles when many are law abiding citizens who’s tool of self defense is overly portrayed by media and gun control advocates as a criminal weapon of mass destruction? The second amendment of the constitution makes clear that to defend our freedoms it is the “right of the people to keep and bear arms”. Many gun control advocates , however, cite the second amendment and by extension the NRA (the nonprofit organization who advocates second amendment rights) as wholly flawed, with on Parkland survivor David Hogg saying “To all politicians out there, if you take money from the NRA, you have chosen death” (New York Times). The NRA however does not bribe politicians to advance the “gun lobby” legislation. The NRA donates to political campaigns and charities while also litigating cases involving gun freedoms and potentially unconstitutional gun control. Despite popular belief, the NRA does not sell guns, they generate their funds through donations. Despite these facts the more underlying conjecture that the second amendment is old fashioned and not fit for today misinterprets its purpose. The founding fathers were aware of how firearm technology would evolve (they even purchased a predecessor to the modern day gatling gun), but they devised the second amendment to protect the rights of those who hunt, wish to defend their property and livelihood, and to protect them against a potentially corrupt governmental oppression. By trying to strip these rights

Jackson 3

away, Americans would lose not only the ability to defend themselves, but defend their freedoms. Overall gun control has continually failed but this fact is pushed aside to favor the modern trigger word of gun violence. Chicago is a city with some of the strictest gun laws in the country yet as cited by a speaker name Juan Reyes during a March for Our Lives protest in Chicago, “Chicago has been plagued with gun violence way before the Parkland Shooting” (New York Times). This may seem paradoxical, however, as Chicago has a ban on firearms within the city limits. This simple fact demonstrates the need for gun freedom for law abiding citizens, because citizens and criminals who have no regard for the law will acquire guns in their own way and use them to terrorize the now defenseless people. This leads into the coining of the popular term “gun violence” when in reality it should be criminal violence as guns are merely tools and if someone wants to harm someone else, they will find a way. In the end, our freedom to own guns allows us to defend ourselves and our freedoms, take that away and criminals will have free reign. In conclusion, while many gun control advocates see guns as vicious weapons that seek to take the lives of children in schools they fail to see the bigger picture. The criminal element that uses guns in this way seek to take the livelihood of American citizens and the only way to counter them is to ensure that our right to bear arms is uninfringed. This is a fact supported by the constitution and the second amendment. It is also reflected in the true statistics behind gun deaths, not the inflated emotional outcry that would state otherwise. Without guns we as Americans can’t defend our lives and our freedoms from criminal or corrupt government. This is why gun rights must remain intact.