College English 101 Essay (2013)

English 101
Essay Three
2 June 2013

From My Cold Dead Hand
Addressing the Gun Debate in America

Audience: Those unwilling to reason on gun control issues.
Message: Gun regulation is not gun control.
Purpose: To persuade those on the other side of the debate to lay down their arms, and work towards a solution to ending gun violence.

Guns are everywhere. You cannot log onto the internet, turn on a television, read a newspaper or book without getting drawn into America’s gun debate.
You cannot even walk down the street without running into a least one gun owner.
In fact, statistics say that there are 300,000,000 guns in the United States. The population for our country in 2009 was estimated to be at 307,000,000. When you break down the data it equates to one gun for every man, woman and child in the United States. That is a lot of guns!
Of the 300,000,000 guns, a hundred million are hand guns. The other 200,000,000 are rifles and shotguns.
Gun ownership is an American right. There can be no denying it. The Second Amendment states:

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.
I cannot dispute that fact. Nor can I dispute that, as of 2012, statistics, gun ownership and manufacturing has been on the rise and gun violence has been on the decline. Yet suicides have increased and so has non-fatal gun injuries and assault.

Yet when we factor in the numbers, the amount of deaths in 2010 was 11,078 people.

When we add in the rate of suicides, which is 19,392 in 2010, we end up with a grand total of 30,470 in all.
These are people, like you and I. They have parents, siblings, children and lovers who will never see them again.
Gun violence hurts more than just the victim. When is enough, enough?
Statistically, this is a small percentage of the population that meets an untimely end. Could you look the victim’s family in the eye and tell them their loved one is just a statistic?

One thing needs to be made perfectly clear. No one is looking to rob you of your guns. Too many debates degrade into pissing contest because we cannot come to terms with what we really mean. Rational gun legislation is not gun control. This means restrictions on assault weapons, gun free zones and background checks to ensure law abiding citizens are the ones getting guns.

Can you honestly say that guns should be in the hands of everyone when most people cannot even properly use a car in the right manner?
We license people to drive cars, why can we not, at the very least, issue background checks to those buying guns?

How can you argue against healthcare but have no problem putting a gun in the hand of a mentally ill person, to kill themselves or possibly harm others?
If you desire to save money, wouldn’t making sure the uninsured don’t end up being shot, be a good idea?

Preventive mental health care would be a good place to start. It would save many lives. Can you not see the insanity in allowing people to acquire military grade weaponry?

You can argue the point that the founding fathers gave us the second amendment to fight against the possibility of a tyrannical government but guns are not the only way to fight oppressors.

A young Chinese man stood up to a tank and put a flower in its cannon. I think we can do without an automatic weapon in the event of martial law.
Do you honestly believe that the army, the very people sworn to protect you, to uphold the laws of the land, are going to turn on the people?
Why fund the army, then? You cannot be both so naively optimistic and cynical at the same time.

What good is an Ak-47 against a bullet-proof tank?
There are so many better ways to fight an oppressive regime.

The U.S. Constitution says that it is an evolving document. Like most things that evolve over time, it adapts to our present environment.
Our environment includes a world with nukes, machine guns and explosives. Things that would turn the founding fathers whiter and make them defecate in their knickers.

You opposed an assault weapon ban. Presidents on both sides of the aisle have signed into law many times.
Why, because people have the right to assault weapons?
They are called assault weapons for a reason because they are meant to assault people.

Would you argue that people have the right to nukes? Seems to me that if we are going to suggest that, then why do we waste our time to protect ourselves against totalitarian regimes?

What about the removal of gun free zones?
I cannot fathom the kind of human being that would allow for schools to have weapons. The number of gun accidents is still extremely high.
Would you really want your child to attend a school that has a sign indicating the number of days it’s been since an accidental misfire?
What about the fear imposed on students, subjected to the sight of a gun each day?

Would that teacher have enough time to get the gun out of a lock box in the event of a school shooting?
We can do better. We must do better for the future of this nation. We must protect our citizenry.

I imagine a future in which gun deaths no longer exist, children can go to school without fear of being shot and innocent people are not collateral damage of an invisible war against reason.

To quote John Lennon:
You may say I’m a dreamer but I’m not the only one. I hope someday you’ll join us and the world will live as one.

Work Citations
Farley, Robert. Et,al. “Gun Rhetoric vs. Gun Facts.” Factcheck. 20 Dec. 2012. 2 June 2013.

Agresti, James. Smith, Reid. “Gun Control Facts”
Justfacts. 10 Sept. 2010. 2 June 2013.

Lennon, John. “Imagine.” Working Class Hero.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.