A sprinkle of rain won’t cause a puddle, however persistent rain will flood the land. Why can’t individual gun safety work the same?

Americans have always prided themselves on their right to bear arms, however many Americans feel that this right is under attack from gun regulations and limitations. However when you take a step back and look at the statistics on gun violence in this country, it is clear that America is messing something up. The united states is the leading country for gun related fatalities and injuries in the world. Many of these deaths are children under the age of 12. It can be argued that Americans are shooting themselves in the foot by resisting, heavily I may add, reasonable gun regulations to help prevent crime involving firearms as well as gun related fatalities. What gun regulations can be or have been implemented and are effective? Who is resisting these regulations and why? Is regulation worth seeking, or are we too stubborn? Will this problem continue to get worse in the future? How can people as individuals address this problem?

According to the Gun Violence Archive there has been over 15,000 incidents involving firearms across the United States so far for the year of 2016. The Gun Violence Archive “is a not for profit corporation formed in 2013 to provide free online public access to accurate information about gun-related violence in the United States. GVA will collect and check for accuracy, comprehensive information about gun-related violence in the U.S. and then post and disseminate it online” (GVA). This is alarming considering it has only been 4 months into the New Year. As a result of these incidents there have been over 3,876 deaths and 7,822 injuries. As of right now the United States is headed down the same track that it has over the past decade, with each year growing far worse than the previous. Is there nothing that Americans can do to help prevent further gun violence as a nation?

The question isn’t what can we get the government to do in order to fix this problem for us, with that state of mind we will continue to head down the same track as the previous decade. The question that Americans as individuals should be asking is, what can I do to make my home a safer place for my family and those that live around me? For the families that own a firearm, they should be asking themselves how can I keep this out of the hands of people I don’t want to touch it?, as well as is my family well informed on how to operate a firearm safely? People who do not own firearms still play a key role in the regulation and safety of firearms, even if you don’t realize it. Staying well informed on how to handle and respond to a workplace shooter, or reporting a firearm on the street can help save lives from unnecessary gun violence.

Some may say that government regulation of what firearm we can and cannot own, as well as the regulation of people who can buy the firearms, is a violation of their constitutional right to bear arms. However how can you argue that the government is abusing their power by regulating firearms, when it is clear that there is a lack of regulations? According to Kate Masters “For nearly two decades, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has devoted scant resources to the study of gun violence, even as fatal shootings constitute a public health issue claiming more than 30,000 lives each year.” This is unacceptable considering the CDC has a multibillion dollar budget, of almost $11 billion, which should be dedicated to researching ways to prevent threats to the public health and safety. “Instead, they say, senior CDC brass made the conscious choice to restrict gun research, rather than risk political retribution…Right now, there is nothing stopping them from addressing this life-and-death national problem”(Masters). It is astounding that a government agency whose main purpose is to prevent threats toward the safety and health of the general public, would rather let the threat continue unhindered rather than face political outcry and potentially address a serious national health crisis. This lack of interest from the CDC in the study of gun violence “has greatly inhibited the ability of social scientists, law enforcement agencies, and policymakers to understand the scope and causes of shootings — while also limiting understanding of interventions that might save lives.” It is clear that political scorns and discontent is more severe than the threats to the health and safety of Americans. Either that or the government does not recognize that the United States has a serious gun violence issue, considering it is the highest rated country for gun violence among 23 other high income countries accounting for over 82 percent of all gun related deaths among all 23 countries.

 

So you may ask yourself now, Why don’t the people put pressure on politicians in order to make things happen politically?

According to the International poll of 1,384 people done by Yale University researchers Benjamin Miller and Peter Aronow most Americans support stricter gun ‘laws, estimating about 53 percent of Americans supporting stricter gun regulations. Whereas “41 percent believe the federal government already requires universal background checks for gun purchases. There is no such law, and Aronow and Miller believe that the misconception could be reducing pressure on politicians to pass stricter gun laws” (Masters). Miller also goes on to say that people are more likely to base their decision on voting on gun regulations based off their idea of fair gun regulation or their misinformed idea of current gun laws. However, it goes to show that a majority of Americans are misinformed about gun laws and regulations that are currently in place. So, this is where we can fill in the “activism gap” that Miller addresses. If Americans take the time to become informed about current gun laws in their state, without even knowing it they are contributing to a national effort. This is a perfect way for individuals who are not comfortable being activists to contribute to addressing a public health issue. Miller goes on to say “We’re thinking of running an experiment where we inform subjects about the current laws that background checks aren’t required for gun sales at gun shows or over the Internet and see whether that shifts people’s positions on stricter gun laws”(Masters). Hopefully this future national survey will shed some light on the degree in which Americans are misinformed about gun policies in this nation.

 

Now, to put things in perspective, gun violence doesn’t just consist of homicides involving firearms, it also includes a large number of teen suicides and child related deaths and injuries according to the Gun Violence Archive and Jennifer Mascia’s article on TheTrace.org. Mascia highlights 15 statistics that help portray gun violence in America over the course of a year. These statistics are honestly shocking and certainly need to be addressed as soon as possible, either by regulation by the government or by the people. In 2015 the amount of gun related deaths surpassed the amount of deaths caused by motor vehicles. “While motor vehicles have been getting progressively safer, guns have killed people at a consistent clip over the past 15 years” (Mascia).

A key reason for this is the use of a firearm as a method of suicide as well as the increase in the amount of firearms available in circulation as Mascia points out in her article. The increased amount of weapons in circulation are easily available to the public makes it easy for anyone to buy a firearm, making this firearm easily available for use in crime and for suicide. Now don’t get me wrong, I am not saying we should make it impossible to buy firearms, I’m saying we should just know who we are selling the weapon to before we sell it to them. Crime is a matter in which the police should handle and the government should prevent and unfortunately is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to gun violence in the United States.

“At a rate of more than twice a day, someone under 18 has been shot and killed” (Mascia), Totaling at least 756 teens and children killed by firearms. Out of the 756 children killed by guns about 75 percent of these children have been under the age of 12. In 2015 there was a recorded 330 mass shootings, shootings in which four or more people are injured or killed, reported in the United States. Everyone remember the impact the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting had on the victim’s families and friends but also the impact it had on politicians, who immediately after began drawing attention towards gun control, or the lack there of, in our country. However it is sad to say that these mass shootings only account for “less than 2 percent of the annual gun deaths” (Mascia).

So this means that the majority of the children killed over the last year were not done in a mass shooting. Now, this is a serious problem. An incredible amount of small firearm related incidents that did not cause a national uproar are beginning to cause the start of a national health crisis as if they were never noticed. It is sad to think that politicians and the people themselves aren’t willing to take safety into their own hands to help prevent unintentional shootings, in order to allow a stronger focus on the criminal aspect of gun violence for law enforcement agencies. Instead it seems we, as a nation, only become activists when a tragedy occurs. However I though the whole point of gun regulations were to prevent further mass shootings and to help save lives.

How Can Gun owners prevent Child related injuries?

A lot of gun owners argue that locking up their guns in a vault is a hassle and prevents them from having quick access to their firearm during the event of an emergency. And as a result gun vaults often get left unlocked or the firearm remains in the open, easily accessible to anyone even children. Many pistol owners like to keep their firearm stored in a drawer or somewhere they can easily reach. Again this provides the same issue of easy access for children and people who you don’t want to have access when you aren’t around. Both of these situations can be fixed by buying a quick access rifle safe or handgun safe. Both of these gun safes are available on amazon.com for reasonable prices. The best way to prevent a gun related tragedy in your home is to make sure your firearms are secured, with their safeties on, and out of reach from young children. Another precaution as I said earlier is to keep your family informed about firearm safety, and to make sure children know that guns are not toys.

We can prevent another tragedy if we work together as a nation, a little bit of effort from a lot of people goes a long way and can save lives. We can stop America’s gun problem and make it a safer place. It is all up to us as individuals to contribute to stopping gun violence and begin treating it as a public health issue.

Sources:

http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/

http://www.thetrace.org/2015/12/gun-violence-stats-2015/

http://www.thetrace.org/2016/02/41-percent-americans-wrong-background-checks-guns/

http://search.proquest.com/docview/1764757417/FF309D10D99435CPQ/6?accountid=14214

http://search.proquest.com/docview/1708138127/FF309D10D99435CPQ/3?accountid=14214

http://search.proquest.com/docview/1733934473/FF309D10D99435CPQ/1?accountid=14214

http://search.proquest.com/docview/465835734/AC1F14CBFD1E4F91PQ/2?accountid=14214

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/13/us/lumberton-nc-store-shooting-manal-abdelaziz.html

http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/getpdf.php?id=cqresrre2013030800

 

 

 

 

WRT 205/Spring 2016                                                                     Grading Rubric: Unit III NYTs Magazine

 

[1]  How well does the title provocatively focus the reader’s attention, as well as the lede? Is it thoughtful, creative, clever? Does it lead the reader into the text and provide some insight into the issue?

1. I think that my title catches the eye of the reader because I feel that the title gives off a sense of urgency or being important. I thought my lede was creative and caught the readers attention by making them think. I also think my lede was simple yet efficient. I believe that my lede lets the reader know what my stance on this argument is and where my article is going to go.

 

[2]  How well does the introductory section of the article invite the reader into the paper, as well as offer up exigency?  How does it locate a problem or controversy within a context that provides background and rationale?

1. Well my introductory paragraph invites the reader by talking about Americans and what they pride themselves on, the right to bear arms. However I then go on to say that we are too sensitive about this right and need to be able to compromise in order to keep everyone safe. My intro provides the idea that guns and gun violence are a national health crisis. I believe that by using “health crisis” provides an extreme sense of exigency.

 

[3] How well does the writer offer up a strong ‘idea’ that requires analysis to support and evolve it, as well as offers some point about the significance of evidence that would not have been immediately obvious to readers.?

1. I used statistics and collected data in order to help drive my argument further in my article. I tried not to use people’s already stated opinion on the subject, rather I used numbers and primary data to show the correlation between the numbers and our society. I believe that this puts a greater significance on the information being provided to the reader.

 

[4] How well does the writer show clarity of thought; uniqueness of presentation; evidence of style; and historicized topics?

1. I believe that my thought process during the composition of this article was pretty clear and straight forward. Although I do think that my paragraphs are a big lengthy for an average NYT article. Although I used some images that were used in my TED talk, I believe that they were used correctly in order to help drive my point across.

 

[5]  How well does the writer recognize that a NYTs Magazine audience will challenge ideas that are overgeneralized or underdeveloped or poorly explained? (that is, did the writer avoid cliché and vagueness or address points/issues readers are likely to have?)  How well did the writer decide about how to develop, sequence, and organize material?

1. I tried to avoid using generalizations that could be argued against, and I tried not to be too vague when addressing statistics and sources. I organized my material in a way that got increasingly more revealing and had a little more importance the more I wrote. Basically the more I wrote the more exigent the material became.

 

[6]  How well does the writer research a controversy, develop a persuasive stance, utilize research about the topic,  and join the ‘debate’ by making an argument of importance?

1. I believe that I researched my controversy quite well because I was able to look over 3 years’ worth of gun violence statistics taken straight from police records as well as government agencies. I was also able to look at politicians responses to mass shootings followed by their views and actions towards gun control.

 

 

[7]  How well does the writer meet or exceed research expectations of assignment requirements (6 appropriate secondary sources, 1 visual source, (or more) and primary research? ).

1. I had used over 8 sources for this article, many which were from proquest or JSTOR. In addition to the primary sources that I used, I used many news websites, as well as a visual source.

 

[8]  How well does the writer integrate secondary and primary sources (that support and complicate the topic) effectively into the text, introducing and contextualizing them, and “conversing” (i.e. no drop-quoting) in ways that deepen and complicate the analysis?

1. I believe that I was able to use my sources in a way that gave them a deeper importance towards my topic. I didn’t take quotes and rearrange them to fit my argument. I used information that supported one another in order to help drive a point across. I would use a quote and not explain why it was important to my article.

 

[9 How well does the writer persuade an audience to consider claims made from a particular position of authority on which you have built your research?  How strong and effective is the writer’s use of rhetorical tools (ethos, logos, pathos)?

1. I believe that my ability to persuade the audience to see the argument my way was pretty successful. I believe that I was able to give off the impression that America is experiencing a gun control crisis and that it needed to be addressed relatively soon. I also believe that I had a very strong sense of exigency as well as ethos in my article.

 

 

[10] How well does the writer select appropriate, interesting, revealing visual?  Has the writer placed a visual strategically in the essay and provided relevant commentary on and/or analysis of them?  Do the visuals contribute to the essay in meaningful ways (i.e. would the essay be affected if the writer took the visual away)?

1. I tried adding visuals after long portions of text, in order to provide my reader with a break from reading long paragraphs. However I do think that my placement of visuals with the appropriate relating paragraphs helps drive my point further to the audience. I believe that my visuals help the reader truly understand and see the significance behind the gun violence statistics that are being provided in the article.

 

 

[11] How well does the writer show development of final article using various drafts, in-class peer editing and workshops, and/or teacher comments?

1. I believe that my drafts have come a long way since the very first draft I wrote. Initially I don’t think that I had much of a vision towards where I was headed with my article. However the more I wrote and the more drafts that I came up with the more and more I knew where I was going and how to go about addressing the audience. I believe that thein class workshops were very beneficial.

 

[12]  How well does the writer use hyperlinks—are they effective/appropriate?

1. I use multiple hyperlink in my article in order to provide the reader with links to relevant, important information about gun violence in the U.S. I also provide hyperlinks to objects that are available for purchase, as well as any interesting ideas the reader may not have any background knowledge on. I also hyperlinked most of my sources.

 

[13]  How well did the writer edit for grammar, style, and usage effectively? Does the writer’s attention to sentence level issues help him/her establish authority or credibility on the issue?

1. I spelled checked and read my article out loud on multiple occasions. I also tried to keep the article in a continuous flow of ideas that related and built off of one another instead of introducing totally new unrelated topics consecutively. I believe that my sources and article appear and sound very credible.