Sythe.org — A Virtual Goods Trading Hub

Antoine · #1 11-20-2010, 03:46 PM

If anyone could quickly read over my essay, and fix some mistakes it would be great. This is an essay supporting my argument FOR gun control in America. It's an expository essay.

Please don't tell me to double space/write my name/put a works cited
They are in my essay, but putting them here is somewhat difficult.

Quote:

Manufactured Death

What is it like to be gun free? Would there be anarchy and total chaos? A reform in gun-control laws is exactly what America needs, yet this action is not realistic. The US should instead tighten its gun control policies. The numbers of deaths due to guns in this country are shocking. In one year, guns have caused the deaths of more children and teens than from cancer, pneumonia, influenza, asthma, and HIV/AIDS combined (Gun Violence in Our Communities). On the other hand, 2nd amendment is part of the American Constitution, and it protects the right to bear arms in America. But this amendment was drafted in a different age, an era of constant fear of war. It is no longer applicable to the US today. Directly removing guns from America would be asking for trouble, so a proposal is necessary in this case. America must strengthen its gun control and enforcement because it can no longer use the Second Amendment to justify them, and the consequences of the current laws in place are too heavy.

The lax gun control laws in the United States have resulted in serious repercussions. A report done in 2003 shows 20 of the nation’s 22 national gun laws were not sufficiently enforced. Furthermore, the report claims that only 2% of federal gun crimes were prosecuted. Every day over 80 Americans die from gun violence (Gun Violence in Our Communities). These astounding figures show how easily criminals can buy guns, use them to kill, and walk free. If the gun control laws were stricter, many more criminals would be prosecuted for gun violence. In addition, less Americans would be killed by gunfire. The policies on gun control in America are so loose that many preventable deaths from firearms occur.

One way to toughen gun control is by applying a nation-wide system of laws, background checks, and harsh jail sentences for gun-related crimes. At present, criminals can buy guns or have friends buy guns for them in a state with slack gun laws and bring it to a state with strict gun laws to commit murder. This is why having the same gun control policies in all the states is so important. That way, criminals would be hard-pressed to commit murder with a gun in the US. Similarly, being a felon, ex-convict, or having committed juvenile crimes should severely limit one’s access to firearms. Implementing these policies would clearly help America in its fight to lower gun violence.

With all the advanced technology in America, the firearm tracking system still has its many flaws. Every one of these flaws has the potential to lead to the death of an individual. But it is impossible for any system to be flawless. To combat this, America must utilize harsher sentences to punish gun crimes. Criminals would think twice about committing murder if they knew that the penalty was extremely severe. This implies that improving background checks before allowing the purchase of firearms and having more brutal punishments to penalize gun violence would greatly reduce the number of criminals using guns as a means to kill.

Changing times call for changing laws. The Founding Fathers of America passed the 2nd Amendment of the American Constitution in the year 1791. With it, they stipulated that, “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” (Second Amendment to the United States Constitution). However, amendments drafted over 200 years ago cannot be applied word for word today. During the period within which the amendment was drafted, its purpose was far different than what it may seem. Early American settlers viewed the right to keep and bear arms as means to overthrow any undemocratic government, to repel invasions, to suppress rebellions, to enable the organization of a militia system, and to accommodate for the natural right of self-defense. Today, America does not need guns to overthrow an undemocratic government. The citizens have the power to elect their own officials along with the power to impeach them. Also, America’s military renders the need to repel invasions, suppress rebellions, and enable the organization of a militia system void. The only part of this amendment which is relevant today is the right of self-defense. However, studies have shown that guns kept in homes are 43 times more likely to kill a member of the household or friend rather than an intruder (Kellermann and Reay 1557-1560), thus questioning whether the self-defense described in the second amendment is useful at all. Hence, the 2nd Amendment passed in 1791 should not be applied to today’s society.

America cannot continue to use a 219 year old law that has been proven faulty for the 21st century. The present-day policies for gun control are too relaxed, as is shown in the many deaths because of them. A simple proposal to formulate gun laws that apply to all the states, develop more complete background checks on gun customers, and utilizing a harsher punishment system for gun crimes is more than enough to start lowering the gun-caused death rates. This proves that it is necessary for the US to change its gun control policy because the rising numbers of innocent deaths caused by guns is growing dangerously high and the 2nd Amendment’s view on gun control has simply become irrelevant in today’s times.

Weasel2013 *BANNED* · #2 11-20-2010, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antoine

If anyone could quickly read over my essay, and fix some mistakes it would be great. This is an essay supporting my argument FOR gun control in America. It's an expository essay.

Please don't tell me to put indents/double space/write my name/put a works cited
They are in my essay, but putting them here is somewhat difficult.

In the first paragraph you should use it's not its for: "Therefore, the US should instead tighten its gun control policies"

In the second paragraph you do not need to cite: It 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” (Second Amendment to the United States Constitution)

It's redundant because you just said what is stating it, and then you cited a second time.

Antoine · #3 11-20-2010, 04:30 PM

No, I put the citation there because I took it from a source. But do I need that for official documents like the Constitution?

And also I'm pretty sure it should be "its".

"it's" = it is, and I'm using the word to show possession.

Thanks for reading it though

.

Angelmax · #4 11-20-2010, 05:40 PM

What is it like to be gun free? Would there be anarchy and total chaos? On the contrary, being gun free is exactly what America needs. However, this is too far from reality. (these sentences are too short, I would incorporate them into one.)Therefore, the US should instead tighten its gun control policies. The 2nd amendment is part of the American Constitution, and it protects the right to bear arms in America. But this amendment was drafted in a different age(don't use 'time era'), an era of constant fear of war. It is no longer applicable to the US today. In addition, the numbers of deaths due to guns in this country are shocking. In one year, guns have caused the deaths of more children and teens than from cancer, pneumonia, influenza, asthma, and HIV/AIDS combined (Gun Violence in Our Communities). However, directly removing guns from America would be asking for trouble. A proposal is necessary in this case. America must strengthen its gun control and enforcement because it can no longer use the 2nd amendment to justify ,and the consequences of the current laws in place are too heavy.

New times need new laws. The Founding Fathers of America passed the 2nd Amendment of the American Constitution in the year 1791. It 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” (Second Amendment to the United States Constitution). However, amendments drafted over 200 years ago cannot be applied word for word today. In the time the amendment was written, its purpose was far different than what one may think. Early American settlers viewed the right to keep and bear arms as means to overthrow any undemocratic government, to repel invasions, to suppress rebellions, to enable the organization of a militia system, and to accommodate for the natural right of self-defense. First, America does not need guns to overthrow an undemocratic government. The citizens have the power to elect our own officials, along with the power to impeach them. Also, America has a military, therefore voiding the need to repel invasions, suppress rebellions, and to enable the organization of a militia system. The only plausible part of this amendment is to enable the right of self-defense. However, do guns at home really help this? Studies have shown that guns kept in homes are 43 times more likely to kill a member of the household or friend rather than an intruder (Kellermann and Reay 1557-1560). This shows that the 2nd Amendment passed in 1791 cannot be applied to our society today. *good paragraph here*

In the United States, the lax control on its gun laws has resulted in serious repercussions. A report done in 2003 shows that 20 of the nation’s 22 national gun laws were not enforced. In addition, only 2% of federal gun crimes were prosecuted. Every day over 80 Americans die (I would possibly add the amount injured here as well, if you can find a reliable statistic) from gun violence (Gun Violence in Our Communities). These astounding figures show how easily criminals can buy guns, use them to kill, and walk free. The policies on gun control in America are so loose that many preventable deaths from firearms occur.

One way of toughening gun control is by using a nation-wide system of gun control laws, having thorough background checks, and employing harsher sentences on gun crimes. At present, criminals can buy guns or have friends buy guns for them in a state with slack gun laws and bring it to a state with strict gun laws to commit murder. This is why having the same gun control policies throughout all the states is so important. Also being a felon, ex-convict, or committing juvenile crimes should prevent access to firearms. With all the advanced technology in America, our tracking system still has its flaws. Every one of these flaws has a large possibility of leading to death. Finally, harsher sentences are needed to punish gun violence crimes. Criminals would think twice about committing murder if they knew that the penalty was extremely severe. America needs gun control laws that apply to each state, improved background checks before allowing the purchase of firearms, and to have more brutal punishments to penalize gun violence.

The US cannot continue to use a 219 year old law that has been proven faulty for the 21st century. The present-day policies for gun control are too relaxed, shown in the many deaths resulting from them. Finally, a simple proposal to formulate gun laws that apply to all the states, develop more complete background checks on gun customers, and utilizing a harsher punishment system for gun crimes is more than enough to start lowering the gun-caused death rates. Therefore, it is necessary for the US to change its gun control policy since the current ones come with the losses of many lives(change this) and the 2nd Amendment’s view on gun control simply has become irrelevant in the modern times.

There you are, I've made a few little corrections or suggestions . Otherwise it's very good.

Antoine · #5 11-20-2010, 07:52 PM

Thanks AngelMax for reading the whole thing and correcting it

, means a lot. Fixed my essay up.

Can anyone give me feedback on Word Choice? I'm feeling I use "gun control" and a few other words too much. I would change it, but I'd rather keep them in if possible since the synonyms I found sound awkward.
Also some feedback on the rewording of my body paragraph's topic sentences in my conclusion would help a lot.

Determinate · #6 11-20-2010, 09:28 PM

I read through it and I think your style of writing lacks something. You don't really tie your ideas together in a manner which allows the reader to reach the conclusion you draw.

I don't really know how I would go about demonstrating this to you here and now, but if you would add my MSN I'd take the time to converse with you over how you could improve.

And, no, I don't think 'gun control' is overused - at least not to the extent that it becomes distracting.

Antoine · #7 11-20-2010, 10:10 PM

Alright added on MSN

, thanks for taking the time to read.

Determinate · #8 11-20-2010, 11:24 PM

Here's what I came up with after our discussion:

Quote:

Changing times call for changing laws. The Founding Fathers of America passed the 2nd Amendment of the American Constitution in the year 1791. With it, they stipulated that, “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” (Second Amendment to the United States Constitution). However, amendments drafted over 200 years ago cannot be applied word for word today. During the period within which the amendment was drafted, its purpose was far different than what it may seem. Early American settlers viewed the right to keep and bear arms as means to overthrow any undemocratic government, to repel invasions, to suppress rebellions, to enable the organization of a militia system, and to accommodate for the natural right of self-defense. Today, America does not need guns to overthrow an undemocratic government. The citizens have the power to elect their own officials along with the power to impeach them. Also, America’s military renders the need to repel invasions, suppress rebellions, and enable the organization of a militia system void. The only part of this amendment which is relevant today is the right of self-defense. However, studies have shown that guns kept in homes are 43 times more likely to kill a member of the household or friend rather than an intruder (Kellermann and Reay 1557-1560), thus questioning whether the self-defense described in the second amendment is useful at all. Hence, the 2nd Amendment passed in 1791 should not be applied to today’s society.

The lax gun control laws in the United States have resulted in serious repercussions. For example, a report done in 2003 shows that 20 of the nation’s 22 national gun laws were not sufficiently enforced. Furthermore, the report claims only 2% of federal gun crimes were prosecuted. Every day over 80 Americans die from gun violence (Gun Violence in Our Communities). [These astounding figures show how easily criminals can buy guns, use them to kill, and walk free. The policies on gun control in America are so loose that many preventable deaths from firearms occur.] need to expand / revise

One way to toughen gun control is by applying a nation-wide system of laws, background checks, and harsh jail sentences for gun-related crimes. At present, criminals can buy guns or have friends buy guns for them in a state with slack gun laws and bring it to a state with strict gun laws to commit murder. This is why having the same gun control policies in all the states is so important. [add another sentence about this point] Similarly, being a felon, ex-convict, or having committed juvenile crimes should severely limit one’s access to firearms. [need some sort of conclusion]

[new idea; new paragraph] With all the advanced technology in America, the firearm tracking system still has its many flaws. Every one of these flaws has the potential to lead to the death of an individual. [Finally, harsher sentences are needed to punish gun violence crimes] you already said this above / consider rephrasing. Criminals would think twice about committing murder if they knew that the penalty was extremely severe. [America needs gun control laws that apply to each state, improved background checks before allowing the purchase of firearms, and to have more brutal punishments to penalize gun violence.] lacks a conclusion / short recap of why you think this should be done

America cannot continue to use a 219 year old law that has been proven faulty for the 21st century. The present-day policies for gun control are too relaxed, as is shown in the many deaths because of them. A simple proposal to formulate gun laws that apply to all the states, develop more complete background checks on gun customers, and utilizing a harsher punishment system for gun crimes is more than enough to start lowering the gun-caused death rates. This proves that it is necessary for the US to change its gun control policy because the rising numbers of innocent deaths caused by guns is growing dangerously high and the 2nd Amendment’s view on gun control has simply become irrelevant in today’s times.

Antoine · #9 11-21-2010, 12:08 AM

Thanks so much for your time man, appreciate it.

Anyway, it doesn't include the intro right? (the one you just posted)

Determinate · #10 11-21-2010, 12:13 AM

No, I left out the intro. I figured that since we hadn't really come to a consensus I'd better not change it.

Antoine · #11 11-21-2010, 09:43 PM

After reading my essay many times over and over, I still don't feel I should split my proposal up into two different parts... because its all very interrelated as part of my proposal. I don't think its a new idea, because its part of my proposal.

^ i know its very confusing what im tryna say

Sythe.org — A Virtual Goods Trading Hub

Take me to

Runescape Markets

Other Game Markets

Support Center

Register an Account