Gun_Control

Human’s technologies have been developing incredibly fast. However, levels of laws, morals, and human rights could not catch up our technologies. Humans have been avaricious in developing weapons to take over other countries or to protect themselves, and now simple trigger pulling can change the faith of a human. In October, 1987, a controversial "concealed- carry" law went into effect in the state of Florida. In a sharp break from the conventional wisdom of the time, that law allowed adult citizens to carry concealed firearms in public. Many people feared the law would quickly lead to disaster. The world is still debating over gun controls; if it is for personal safety or safer society. Are we having guns to protect ourselves or causing blood running in the streets' The two essays of Silko’s and Gopnik’s argues in different point of view of carrying firearms. ‘Shootings’ by Adam Gopnik argues that private possession of firearms should be illegal. Gopnik begins his essay with a horrible incident of Virginia Tech, which the mental disorder student, Cho Seung-Hui, kills thirty three innocent students including himself. Gopnik gives more of the evidences of firearm incident such as a gunman killing sixteen children and a teacher in Scotland in 1996. On the contrary, ‘In the Combat Zone’ by Leslie Marmon Silko denies the necessity of restrictions on gun use, because women feel protected from harm when a gun is in their possession. She claims that if people were subject to abuse because of the inability to own guns, illegalizing of guns cannot guarantee the safety of the society. Therefore, the arguments of two authors, Silko and Gopnik, oppose each other. After reading both essays, I thought there were many arguments that are strong. However, there were also weaknesses of these arguments, which was not persuasive enough. Personal experiences could be made out by the writers, but Gopnik approved his argument by using history based incidents. These can persuade readers into greater manipulation as I did. I totally agree with Gopnik that there is no reason that any private citizen in a democracy should own a handgun. He claims in the essay that, “The whole world saw that the United States has more gun violence than other countries because we have more guns and willing to sell them to madman who want to kill people.” (Gopnik, 695) As Gopnik mentioned Virginia Tech massacre, even an obviously disturbed student, with a history of mental illness, was able to buy guns whose purpose is to kill people. The author also stated interesting reasoning at the end of essay, “Nations with tight gun laws have, on the whole, less gun violence; countries with somewhat restrictive gun laws have some gun violence; countries with essentially no gun laws have a lot of gun violence.” (Gopnik, 696) However, I thought Gopnik’s essay was not long enough to convey the readers fully. Therefore, his essay could have been lengthier and more persuasive. Contrary to the history based incidents, Silko’s essay illustrated mostly based on her own experiences. The author argues in the beginning of the essay, “Men who have been in combat know the feeling of being a predator’s target, but it is difficult for men to admit that we women live our entire lives in a combat zone.” (Silko, 843) Of course women are more likely to be targeted by criminals, however in my opinion, it is not necessary for women to carry firearms to protect themselves. What I mean by that is there are many other things that could be used as protection other than guns, such as stun guns which are much easier to use. In fact, most women do not know how to use guns properly, even if they do; it is hard for them to actually take shoots and to aim. But Silko does have a good point that women must learn how to take aggressive action individually, apart from the police and the courts. She also mentions what her father told her, “….no matter how big and strong the man was, a gun in our hand equalized all differences of size and strength.” (Silko, 844) However guns seem to me, it just brings more violence in the streets and the world. Therefore, private possession of firearms should be illegalized. ‘Second Thoughts: What the Right to Bear Arms Really Means'’ by Akhil Reed Amar questions about what the true meaning of the second amendment is. “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” is the second amendment listed on the Bill of Rights. The author translated into modern language, “An armed and militarily trained citizenry being conductive to freedom, the right of the electorate to organize itself militarily shall not be infringed.” (Amar, 295) As it was written back in history, there are many decipherments about it, and of course, no right and wrong answers. Also, back in many years, military units were necessary to defend against enemies that were trying to take over United States, and weapons were only given to trained military people. Therefore, citizens could not have private possession of firearms. Thus, the second amendment is against the Bill of Rights for citizens to have firearms in their households. In Korea, which is where I am from, is a gun controlled nation. When I was growing up, I have never seen a gun, or heard firearm-related incidents. Even, most police officers do not carry guns. Just like Gopnik mentioned in the essay, since Korea has tight gun laws, there are much less gun violence than United States. Also, just because you are women, does not mean you would not commit crimes. I understand that guns may prevent women from many rape incidents around the world. However, In fact, recently the rate of women criminals with deadly weapons has increased. On Feb 21, 2011, 40 year-old female, Kellie Mitchell, has been charged with felony aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, larceny theft and resisting an officer in the recovery of stolen property. The report said she was accused of stealing underwear, perfume and shirts from the local store, then threatened a store security worker with a gun after being questioned about the theft. I believe humans need to start trusting each other to make our society safer. Everyone need to know what will happen if firearms go into wrong hand of madman such as the incidents in Virginia Tech, Kelly Elementary, and many other. It is now time to think about how to make our society as a whole safer other than thinking about how to make better personal safety for safer future of your family.