There are three different argument styles today that are commonly used: Classical, Rogerian, and Toulmin. For gun control, I think that the Rogerian style would be best for a research paper. This is because not only does it back up the position I take, but it explains how this position benefits all (even opponents). In a research paper about gun control, I think that it is important to explain how my side will benefit even those against it. The format of the Rogerian argument style would also flow nicely in a research paper about gun control–first the introduction, which then leads into the context of the situation. I could talk about the mass shootings that have unfortunately become all to frequent as of late. Then, this would lead into the writer’s position, my solution to these types of problems. I would provide evidence for my position, and finally in the end, do what I was talking about earlier, explaining how my position benefits my opponents. It is for all these reasons that I believe that the Rogerian method would best fit the format of my research paper.
Just today, President Barack Obama released his fiscal budget for 2015. Obama wants more gun control in this country, and this can be reflected in his budget. There are measures in it to reduce gun violence, train police in shooter situations, and to identify mental health problems. This may be a way that Obama is able to implement stricter gun control regulations, as he has pushed for this since the Newtown shooting, but nothing has been able to get passed in the Senate. I guess only time will tell as to what our country’s future in gun law holds.
Lately in the United States there have been numerous public shootings. It seems like the ones that stand out the most are the school shootings. This is due to the fact that the murder of innocent children is such a horrifying thing. It is disgusting that some crazy psychopathic people in this world would kill children. However, it is not enough to simply condemn these people; we need to make sure that it does not happen ever again. How to do this is the question.
I enjoyed reading the following article because it had several possible solutions to stopping school shootings. It is possible that one of these, or perhaps a combination of some of the ideas could indeed stop school shootings. Also, the article offered ideas from both sides of the gun control debate; it did not seem to be biased towards either side.
The argument of gun control itself has so many levels to it. It is such a heated topic that the debate over it isn’t only which side (pro gun control or non) is correct, but much more. I just read an article that is debating on whether or not federal funding for firearms research has been cut off by the NRA or not. According to the article, gun control advocates have falsely reported that there has been a lack of firearms studies due to a lack in federal funding. The article attacks these organizations and people for finding a way to make it look like there has been a reduction in firearm research as of late.
As I read this article, I found it amazing how the gun control debate has escalated to levels such as these. It is much more than just trying to prove one’s side of the case; it includes trying to denigrate the opposing side. The argument has turned to ad hominem, and I thought this was rather interesting.
So I have a friend on the soccer team who is from England. We enjoy talking about interesting things, and one day the topic of guns came up somehow. I grew up in the southern U.S., and my friend in England. I grew up shooting guns, while he has never even held a weapon. Needless to say, we have very differing views on the issue of gun control. He feels that the U.S., just like England should have a ban on all firearms. One of his main reasons for this was that he said it would greatly lower the murder rate. Also, he said that he does not think that anyone absolutely has to own a weapon. I think that most of his beliefs stem from the fact that he was raised in England, but he did have some good points. I plan on conducting a formal interview with him when writing my final research paper, using him as a source.
As I was writing an exploratory paper on the different sides in the gun control debate, I found a couple pretty good summaries of some of the arguments on both sides of the debate. A fellow blogger who goes by the name of Morris M pretty much summed up both sides (those in favor of gun control and those against). He created a list of 10 arguments for both sides, and was even kind enough to provide links to his credible sources. This greatly helped me write my paper, and I think that they are pretty decent summaries for those who do not know much about the debate in gun control. For this reason, I have put the links to both sides of the argument below. I must warn people however, that I think that the 10 reasons for gun control is a much stronger list than the 10 reasons for gun rights. This is not because I personally believe in gun control, but rather because Morris M does, and I think that in places it is easy to see his bias in the gun rights list. Therefore, there are probably stronger and better arguments for gun rights out there, but for the time being, this one will have to do.
I’ve never done a blog before, so this is a new and rather daunting experience to me. This blog is for a college class I am in, in which I must create and maintain a blog about a specific subject that I will be writing about all semester. I have chosen to write about gun rights, mainly because of the large number of mass shootings that have been occurring lately in the U.S. It is obvious that something must be done to stop these catastrophes, but no one is quite sure what that is. I am going to try to research the topic and try to decide which side of the gun-law debate is the “right” one.