1. Brown 1
Stephanie Brown
FYS 100
Debate Paper
10 February 2014
What underlying issues are being debated in the readings?
o The political and social debate is over how much gun control is appropriate. (Gun
Control: An Overview)
o The point of view of social science is how efficient is gun control in reducing
violent crimes? (Gun Control: An Overview)
o The ethical point of view is about “the right to bear arms against the protection of
citizens and prevention of crime.” (Gun Control: An Overview)
o The legal question is, “how the Second Amendment to the US Constitution should
be interpreted,” and whether or not the right to bear arms extends to private
citizens or “well-regulated militias.” (Gun Control: An Overview)
o There is also the legal issue of “whether more legislation is needed, or whether
better enforcement of current legislation is required.” (Gun Control: An
Overview)
According to supporters of stricter gun control, what are some possible advantages
in favor of supporting the issue?
o Supporters of stricter gun control are The Brady Venter to Prevent Gun Violence
(Gun Violence: An Overview)
o Advantages of stricter gun control: “increase of regulation could significantly
reduce both the number and the scale of gun-related violent crimes,”
(Counterpoint: Gun Control Saves Lives), “gun violence strains the US and
economy and health system” (Gun Control: An Overview), less accidental
shootings, suicides, and criminal activity, and those who are deemed mentally
unfit would not be able to purchase a gun.
According to those in opposition, what are some possible disadvantages to stricter
gun control laws?
o Those in opposition are the NRA who is against most gun legislation.
o Disadvantages of stricter gun control laws: “requiring better safety controls on
firearms places unfair burdens on manufacturers,” (Gun Control: An Overview),
does gun control lower the overall rate of violence?, “stricter gun control laws
have done nothing to prevent gun violence,” (Gun Control: An Overview), “the
Second Amendment protects the rights of individuals to bear arms” (Gun Control:
An Overview), and gun control “take(s) away rights granted by the Constitution.”
(Point: Controlling Gun Violence is More Important than Controlling Guns)

2. Brown 2
What fallacies of reasoning emerge from the debate?
o Guns are not the sources of gun violence, but they are items that function
according to how the gun owner uses them and their intentions for the gun
o “The problem is not with the gun, it is with the people who use guns
irresponsibly.” (Point: Controlling Gun Violence is More Important than
Controlling Guns)
o The Second Amendment grants people the right to bear arms, but does not say
how people should use their guns while not serving in the militia or mention about
the use of guns for sport or hunting
o The historical setting has changed since the Second Amendment was created and
things are not the same in the US as they were when it was created.
What alternative policy/programs have been proposed or might be developed?
o “National Firearms Act and the Federal Firearms Act were passed banning
machine guns, imposing taxes on gun sales, and regulating certain kinds of sales
and shipments of guns.” (Gun Control: An Overview)
o 1968 Gun Control Act which outlawed mail-order sales of guns. (Gun Control:
An Overview)
o Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act and the Brady Handgun
Violence Prevention Act (banned various types of assault weapons entirely and
the latter imposed a mandatory five-day waiting period and background check on
all sales of firearms to unlicensed individuals) (Gun Control: An Overview)
o Renewal of 1994 assault weapons ban and rewriting of the ban’s loopholes; gun
manufacturers would no longer be able to comply with the law by making merely
cosmetic changes to their weapons that do not diminish their deadly capacity
(Counterpoint: Gun Control Saves Lives)
What implications does the debate have for families in society?
o Families’ in society need to feel as if their children are safe.
o Restrictions that have been proposed have included mandatory child-safety locks
on guns and child-access prevention laws. (Gun Control: An Overview)
o Guns have been known to be used for sport and hunting. In the early days it was
necessary for guns to be used to provide food for families and protection.
o The issue of protection in the home causes people to be against gun control, so
that they can own guns to protect themselves and their families against any harm.

3. Brown 3
The issue of gun control policies and legislations are a major debate taking place in the
United States the past few years. There have been many recent events that have accounted for the
uprising and concern of gun control laws, such as the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting and the
shooting in the Colorado movie theatre. The mixtures between these recent incidents and
previous shootings, such as Columbine and Virginia Tech have once again spurred the debate on
creating more gun control legislation. Although there has been reason to improve societies’ use
of guns and decrease the amount of violence in the United States, there doesn’t necessarily mean
there needs to be more gun control legislation. I believe that there need to be less gun control
legislation or no change in the current gun control laws.
Some people do not understand what exactly people mean by the term gun control. Gun
control is, “any action taken by the federal government or by state or local governments to
regulate, through legislation, the sale, purchase, safety, and use of handguns and other types of
firearms by individual citizens.” (Gun Control: An Overview). Some people may wonder “why
is gun control a major issue?” Well those for more gun control believe that having more laws
against guns in the United States will help prevent gun violence and major crimes because laws
in other countries against guns have improved their crime rates. What people do not take in
consideration is that “some small European nations that severely restrict guns have lower murder
rates than the United States, but their minimal populations make them noncomparable.” (Debate:
Gun Control in the United States). This being said other countries have different cultures and
ways of life, so we cannot compare how their gun control bans affect their countries to how gun
control bans in the United States will affect us here.
Recent studies have shown that there is no correlation or accurate data to show the use of
firearms and violence in the United States. According to the article Gun Control Overview:

4. Brown 4
Prevalence of Gun Use and the Regulatory Response, “existing data do not show whether the
number of people shot and killed with semiautomatic assault weapons declined during the 10year period (1994 to 2004) that those firearms were banned from further proliferation in United
States.”
The major debate that takes place over gun control is the true meaning of the Second
Amendment to the US Constitution. The Second Amendment states, “A well regulated militia
being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall
not be infringed.” The Second Amendment can all be a matter of how it is interpreted. As the
article Point: Controlling Gun Violence is More Important than Controlling Guns states, “…the
Second Amendment grants people the right to bear arms, it does not provide any guidance about
how the people should use their arms when they are not serving in the militia.” This is the cause
for much debate because it does not mention the use of guns for sport, hunting, self-defense, and
crimes. Many people believe that since the Second Amendment was written in a different time
period we need to apply it to the way the United States is now and take it in that context.
The article Point: Controlling Gun Violence is More Important than Controlling Guns
makes a good point in saying, “Guns are lethal weapons that can be used to commit violent acts.
However, guns are not the source of the troubling violence in our society; guns are merely tools
that function according to the intentions of gun owners….The problem is not with the gun, it is
with the people who use guns irresponsibly.” There are so many people who do use their guns
responsibly, so why should those who are not criminals be punished for the actions of those who
are criminals?
No studies have shown that law abiding citizens who own guns are likely to commit
murder. Studies do suggest that individuals who are likely to commit murder are those with a

5. Brown 5
long criminal history of primarily nonviolent crimes, but have a large amount of violent crimes.
There are studies that date all the way back to the 1890s showing that almost all murderers have
lifelong criminal records. (Debate: Gun Control in the United States). A citizen having the right
to bear arms means that citizens can protect themselves from harm of dangerous criminals. There
is a study by Kopel and colleagues that shows “firearms are used over half a million times are
year against home invasion burglars, usually the burglar flees as soon as he finds out that the
victim is armed, and no shot is ever fired.” (Debate: Gun Control in the United States). This
shows that against popular belief the burglar is hardly ever harmed which saves the victim and
prevents a major accident. There is a criminological study that found “that for those attacked by
criminals “resistance with a gun appears to be the most effective [response] in preventing serious
injury [to victims, and] for preventing property.” The same study also noted that “the use of gun
by the victim significantly reduces her chance of being injured.”” (Debate: Gun Control in the
United States). For those who believe that defending themselves with a gun only causes more
harm, “A U.S. National Crime Victimization study concluded that defending against felons with
a gun helps victims 65% of the time and make things worse only in about 9% of the time.”
(Debate: Gun Control in the United States).
With all of the statistics and different sides of the debate on gun control there can be a lot
of information and a lot to say on each side of the debate. Sometimes, the debate can come down
to pure opinion, but as studies show there has been no defining results showing the correlation
between firearms and gun violence thus far. We can debate all we want, but until laws that are
already in place and have been in place start to work in the US, there should be no more laws
enforced because they will be not likely to work either. With the amount of people owning guns
in the United States it will be hard to enforce these laws without backlash. Overall, there should

6. Brown 6
be no more laws made for gun control legislation because the people of the United States do
have the right to bear arms as the Second Amendment states, and until there is significant proof
and agreement on both sides of the debate there should be no change in how the way things work
right now.

7. Brown 7
Works Cited
Ballaro, BeverlyFinley, Laura. “Counterpoint: Gun Control Saves Lives.” Points Of View: Gun
Control (2013):3. Points of View Reference Center.Web. 9 Feb. 2014.
Bowman, JeffreyNewton, Heather. “Point: Controlling Gun Violence Is More Important Than
Controlling Guns.” Points Of View: Gun Control (2013):2. Points of View Reference
Center.Web. 9 Feb. 2014.
Boylan, Michael, et al. “Dabate: Gun Control In The United States.” ClinicialOrthopaedics&
Related Research 471. 12 (2013): 3934. Academic Search Premier. Web. 10 Feb. 2014.
“Gun Control Overview.”Congressional Digest 92.3 (2013): 3-7. Academic Search Premier.
Web. 10 Feb. 2014.
Lee, M.Stingl, Alexander. “Gun Control: An Overview.” Points Of View: Gun Control (2013):1.
Points of View Reference Center.Web. 9 Feb. 2014.
Wilson, Brian. “Point: The Unrealistic Goals Of Gun Control.” Points of View: Gun Control
(2013): 5. Points of View Reference Center.Web. 10 Feb. 2014.