I am responding to a Newsday article written by Justin Haskins responding to the Las Vegas shooting and on the issue of gun control. Haskins makes the claim that strict gun laws will not work in this country as they already do not work. He also wants to explain why this will not work "the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, a group that supports enhancing gun-control laws, gave in its recent gun-control report card “F” grades (for having lax gun laws) to five of the six states that have the lowest homicide rates"(Haskins). Haskins points out here that there is correlation between having gun laws that aren't strict and having low homicide rates. He also points out that the six states of Arkansas, Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, Alaska, and West Virginia are the only states that have 50% of households that own firearms. He points out that these states are among the top ranked for having the lowest homicide rates. He discusses how the statistics from cities that have very low firearm ownership go hand in hand with this. These statistics show that these cities such as Chicago have a very large number of gun-related murders.
Haskins doesn't just stop there as he also wishes to prove that gun control will also not help to stop mass shootings. He says that a statistics analysis shows that both Australia and Britain have not had less mass shootings or even gun-related murder rates since they have put their very strict gun control laws into affect. He then goes on to explain that even if the facts supported gun control that it would be very hard to put this into affect due to the large number of guns in the United States. I thought this was a good article as it did not just represent Haskins opinion and show him attacking the beliefs of others. He rather showed the other side that we aren't used to hearing and he showed it with facts and it made it a very good article. This article represented my opinion as well that gun control is not the way to go in the United States.
Haskins doesn't just stop there as he also wishes to prove that gun control will also not help to stop mass shootings. He says that a statistics analysis shows that both Australia and Britain have not had less mass shootings or even gun-related murder rates since they have put their very strict gun control laws into affect. He then goes on to explain that even if the facts supported gun control that it would be very hard to put this into affect due to the large number of guns in the United States. I thought this was a good article as it did not just represent Haskins opinion and show him attacking the beliefs of others. He rather showed the other side that we aren't used to hearing and he showed it with facts and it made it a very good article. This article represented my opinion as well that gun control is not the way to go in the United States.
I have also heard that there is a small city in the United States that requires all of its citizens to have guns. Apparently, this city has very low crime. Overall, great post!
ReplyDeleteI really agree and think that gun control is not the right way to go. I think the right way to go is to check people for a mental illness.
ReplyDeleteYou do a nice job of explaining the article, but you need to work on your transitions. (most of your sentences begin with "he") Also, you should consider informing the reader why you chose to read this article. All in all, it is a good post with a couple of minor errors.
ReplyDeleteI agree that gun control will not work in the United States. It is a violation of the 2nd Amendment, and the people will not give it up.
ReplyDeleteSometimes limiting rights can make people want things more, so I completely agree. Great use of the article in your blog as well!
ReplyDeleteYou hit many great points in this response, and I agree with your arguments. I love the explicit research that you did, and I hope to see the same outcomes as you! Great post.
ReplyDelete