Rebuttal for Why gun control won’t end mass murder by Tammy Bruce
Gun control is currently a major point of discussion in the United States owing to the significant number of school shootings that have occurred over the years. In the first two months of 2018 alone, there have been 18 school shootings, and citizens are becoming increasingly concerned for their children’s wellbeing (Silva, Jason & Joel, 2018). Most of the raised issues revolve around the need for the government to implement more gun control measures. In her article, Tammy Bruce takes a different approach to the issue altogether to argue that increasing regulations would not help in solving the problem. However, introducing better gun control laws would be a positive step towards reducing the number of mass shootings in the country thereby ensuring the safety of children in schools and the society in general.
To start with, Tammy makes the argument that guns might not be the problem, and that there might be other underlying factors that should be investigated. She points out that it criminals typically do not follow the law and as such, introducing new gun regulations would not help in solving the issue. Over the years, guns have been used in many criminal activities including burglary and gang-related violence. She explains that even in the absence of guns, criminals are still going to find ways to commit their crimes and, in such situations, Americans are going to be denied the right to protect themselves.
However, her argument does not factor in the efforts implemented by the authorities to address criminal behaviors. True to the fact, criminals defy the law in a given opportunity, but this does not imply that the government cannot introduce laws to control their actions. For example, drug trafficking is prohibited and there are still many criminals involved in the drug trade, but the government still makes policy changes to curb the problem even further. Having better gun control laws is not a permanent solution to the problem, but it plays a major role in mitigating its effects on the society.
Another argument Tammy makes is that most of the people who carry out mass shootings were under some form of medication that affected them negatively. She gives the example of the “jihad pill” an amphetamine that is quite prevalent in Saudi Arabia, and is commonly used by ISIS suicide bombers. She explains that the government could focus on regulating and controlling medications as they might be the contributing factors to the increasing gun shootings in the country. She also provides statistics showing that at least 70% of people in the country are on some form of antidepressant, opioid, or antibiotics. These medications are known to alter a person’s moods significantly, and this may result in portrayal of violent behavior.
Inasmuch as she presents a valid point relating to the harmful effects of medications on a person’s behavior, she fails to provide information on the types of drugs used in the country that would actually lead to gun violence. The “jihad pill” is banned in many countries across the world, and none of the shooters in the previous cases in the United States was under this medication. Furthermore, regulating medications and drug use is not directly linked to gun violence. With this regard, while the government could introduce new measures to address prescription medication, there would still be a serious problem with gun violence. It is vital that steps are implemented to ensure that gun access is regulated accordingly.
Tammy considers the increasing demand for gun control laws to be a political agenda that political parties are holding against each other. On one hand, some argue on the need to enforce the Second Amendment, which gives every American the right to possess firearms. Conversely, others argue that the regulations in the country have been quite reluctant, thereby providing an environment where gun violence can prosper. Her ideology is that this is an attempt to undermine the government’s efforts and to divert the attention of the public from other controversial issues taking place within these political parties.
However, she fails to acknowledge that mass shootings are becoming a serious problem in the country, with majority of the victims being children and innocent people on the streets. While it might be a political struggle for power, there is a serious need for the introduction of suitable regulations that ensure the safety of the society. The introduction of better gun control laws would go a long way as to ensure that citizens can go about their businesses without the fear of a mass shooting occurring.
To summarize, through her article, Tammy Bruce presents a perspective on gun control that sheds light into other factors that should be considered. However, she fails to take note of how guns have become a major problem in the country, and the dire need to control their use. While introducing stronger regulations might not be the ultimate solution, it paves way for other regulations to be introduced.
Bruce, Tammy. ” Why gun control won’t end mass murder.” Opinion, October 4 2017, http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/10/04/tammy-bruce-why-gun-control-wont-end mass-murder.html. Accessed 25 February 2018
Silva, Jason R., and Joel A. Capellan. “The media’s coverage of mass public shootings in America: fifty years of newsworthiness.” International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 2018, pp. 1-21.
We have the capacity, through our dedicated team of writers, to complete an order similar to this. In addition, our customer support team is always on standby, which ensures we are in touch with you before, during and after the completion of the paper. Go ahead, place your order now, and experience our exquisite service.
Use the order calculator below to get an accurate quote for your order. Contact our live support team for any further inquiry. Thank you for making BrilliantTermpapers the custom essay services provider of your choice.