wrd 104-research paper

7/29/2019 WRD 104-Research Paper

1/12

Macias 1

Stephanie Macias

Kate Flom

WRD 104-231

18 March 2013

Time To Control the Situation

In 1764, before America was even founded, the first recorded shooting

occurred during which four Lenape warriors shot their teacher in their school in

Pennsylvania (csmonitor.com). The Sandy Hook Elementary shooting in Connecticut,

being the most recent and some may argue, the most devastating school shooting, has

reiterated and emphasized how dangerous gun violence can be and exhibited the

importance of taking action to prevent further catastrophes. Gun violence does not only

consist of school shootings, but all public shootings in general. This being said, for

several decades now, gun control has become a prominent as well as a controversial

debate among society and the US government. Prior to the most tragic public shootings

such as Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, the Colorado Movie Theatre, and the

Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings, I have been and continue to be in resilient

support of stricter gun control laws in the US. Recent research on the issue has

demonstrated the immense impact mass shootings have had on society that have

highlighted the importance of gun control, those who support gun control have better

reasoning, and the overall better atmosphere gun control will provide for society.


2/12

Macias 2

As a result of the most recent public and mass shooting in Connecticut, gun

control has resurfaced as a controversial issue among the US government and society. As

well as grasping the governments, the publics, the Sandy Hook Elementary School

shooting received a massive amount of attention from the media in which the importance

of gun control was made evident. This can be seen in Peter Baker, a political writer and

newspaper reporter forThe Washington Postand The New York Times, and Michael D.

Shears, newspaper reporter forThe New York Times and chief writer forThe Caucus

Blog, Obama to Put Everything Ive Got Into Gun Control in which they describe how

the ceremony held for the victims of the Connecticut shooting impacted the nation,

reflected a decision by the White House to seize on public outrage to challenge the

political power of the National Rifle association and other forces that have successfully

fought new gun laws for decades (Par. 5). Here, it is made evident just how much the

shooting moved the public and certain politicians to support stricter gun control. Other

instances that demonstrate how the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting emphasized

the importance of stricter gun control can be found throughout, lead newspaper reporter


3/12

Macias 3

forThe New York Times, Michael Coopers, Debate on Gun Control Is Revived, Amid a

Trend Toward Fewer Restrictions. More specifically, this idea can be seen when

Cooper explains the failed attempts of Democratic Governor, John W. Hickenlooper, to

push gun legislation forward following the Aurora Theatre shooting but his luck to gain

more attention after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting (Par 7-10). Governor

Hickenlooper and the issue of gun control in general received more attention this time

perhaps because people found this mass shooting the most devastating but also because

these shootings are all adding up.

Similarly, other initial reactions to the Connecticut shooting demonstrate how

detrimental it was in which gun control has become more of a necessity than an option.

Initial reactions to the shooting include politicians such as Governor Pat Quinn and

Governor Andrew M. Cuomo commenting, As governor and as a parent, I intend to

spearhead passage of strict laws that will protect our children and the people of Illinois

from gun violenceand calling the shooting a wake-up call for aggressive action


4/12

Macias 4

(Cooper, par. 12-13). Both these governors comprehend the magnitude of the problem of

gun violence in the US and so are supporting and calling for action to prevent further

tragedies. Vice President Biden stated, I have never seen the nations conscience so

shaken by what happened at Sandy Hook. The world had changed and is demanding

action (Baker, par. 12). Other mass shootings definitely arose attention and action in the

US but there has been a staggering amount of mass shooting recently, drawing even more

attention to the issue. Despite not supporting gun control legislation, after the Newton

shooting Republican Representative Robert W. Goodlatte explained, But in terms of

background checks, in terms of keeping weapons out of the hands of criminals and

people who have serious mental health difficulties, we want to do that, and we would

take a close look at that (Baker, par. 15). Prior to the Newtown shooting, Representative

Goodlatte did not support any form of gun legislation but now he is not only considering

background checks on gun buyers but also suggests he will support a form of this law.

For any issue or choice, a person has an opinion, which they derive for certain

reasons. Peoples support or opposition forgun control legislation is due to their

reasoning that must derive from some source. A multitude of research studies have been

performed in order to explore and analyze what possible reasoning people have for either

supporting or opposing gun control. For instance, looking at peoples reasoning for gun

control through a social lens, Katarzyna Celinska, a scholar at John Jay College of

Criminal Justice within the University of New York, performs a study and discusses the

results in her Individualism and Collectivism in America: The Case of Gun Ownership

and Attitudes Toward Gun Control. In her studies, Celinska specifically sets out to

address the validity of the claim that most Americans have individualistic lifestyles.


5/12

Macias 5

Celinskas results determined societys attitudes and opinions on issues are due to either

their collectivist or individualistic ideologies. In accordance to the subject of gun

restrictions, she explains, Holding individualistic values is a consistent strong predictor

of opposing gun control measures in all attitudinal models (244). In other words, those

who oppose gun control legislation are more likely to have individualistic ideologies.

Celinska goes more in depth about her studys results in which she explains, those

who oppose gun control tend to hold individualistic views and by opposing any

limitations on gun ownership, they seek to protect their own self-interest, that of their

families, and the interests of those with whom they closely affiliate, associate, identify

with (233). This means that gun control opposition focus on themselves and fails to take

into consideration the well being of all of society.

Likewise, Robin M. Wolpert, a lawyer whom graduated from Cornell University,

and James G. Gimpel, a professor who earned his Ph.D. from the University of Chicago,

offer a psychological perspective to the issue of gun control in their Self-Interest,

Symbolic Politics, and Public Attitudes Toward Gun Control. Studying whetherself-

interest is a contributing factor in an individuals view on gun control laws. Wolpert and


6/12

Macias 6

Gimpel found self-interest to be a key factor in determining whether someone supports or

opposes gun laws (255). Similar to Celinskas findings, Wolpert and Gimpels results

demonstrate opposition to the issue tend to only take personal aspects into consideration,

excluding society as a whole. Not only did they find self-interest to impact how

individuals view gun control, but Wolpert and Gimpel also found banning guns raises

more self-interest reactions in the public (258). This here goes along to show just how

much self-interest plays a major role in someones decision to support or oppose gun

legislation. While addressing different claims, both studies performed by Celinska and

Wolpert and Gimpel, found an individuals reasoning for their support or opposition to

the issue to be derive from personal qualities such as individualistic and self-interest

factors. Gun control should be enforced because those supporting gun control have better

reasoning in which they are actually taking into consideration what is best for society as a

whole.

Most advocates of gun control believe and argue the more gun laws that are

enforced, the less crime and violence there will be. While some believe this, the


7/12

Macias 7

opposition may argue that gun control laws in fact have little or no influence on crime

and violence in the US. John C. Moorhouse, a professor of Economics at Wake Forest

University, and Brent Wanner, a graduate from Wake University, set out to determine

which claim is true in theirDoes Gun Control Reduce Crime or Does Crime Increase

Gun Control? Moorhouse and Wanner perform a study in which they analyze D.R.

Murrays regression analysis and vector of economic and social factors (109-121). By the

end of their studies, the determined, The findings of this study that gun control is

ineffective in reducing crime rates are consistent with the vast majority of other studies

that use state data (121). Moorhouse and Wanners results demonstrated that gun control

does not affect crime rates like the opposition claimed it did not. For this reason,

opposition to gun control believes and argues there is no purpose for gun regulations and

anything of the sort if there is no decrease in gun violence.

Despite their results showing gun laws have no effect on crime and violence,

shortly afterwards their study reads, Nevertheless questions remain The failure to

find a statistically significant negative relationship between gun control and crime rates


8/12

Macias 8

may be because gun control is ineffective or because the aggregation problems attendant

the use of state data could mask the potential relationship (121). Here, it is apparent that

Moorhouse and Wanner are doubting the reason for why their results were what they

were. Their doubts demonstrate that the claim that gun laws have no effect on crime rates

is not necessarily valid. Even after all the research performed, Moorhouse and Wanner

could not fully and accurately prove the claim that gun control laws have no influence on

gun violence. For this reason, gun laws should continue to be enforced in the United

States.

Stricter gun control should continue to be enforced not only because gun violence

has led to devastating tragedies recently, supporters of gun legislation have better

reasoning than opposition but also because gun control benefits our economy. Philip J.

Cook, a public policy professor at Duke University whom researches criminal justice,

weapons, violent crime and other similar subjects and wrote Gun Violence: The Real

Costs, and James A. Leitzel, the director of public policy studies at the University of

Chicago, look at the effects of gun control on the United States economy in their,

Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy: An Economic Analysis of the Attack on Gun Control.

Even more, Cook and Leitzel study and evaluate Albert O. Hirschmans The Rhetoric of

Reaction Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy. After doing so, they find that their results differ

from Hirschmans, in which they find a non-regulated gun market would not benefit the

economy (117). Having an unregulated gun market would could cause our economy

problems since there have been gun regulations previously. This being said, guns should

continue to regulated and more so than before. Also, Cook and Leitzels results refute and

disprove Moorhouse and Wanners results that suggest gun control does not affect crime


9/12

Macias 9

rates and gun violence. This can be seen in Cook and Leitzels results section, Our

analysis suggests that moderate controls will reduce the availability of firearms, even to

criminals and youths who traffic only in the illicit market, and will likely result in lower

social costs from firearm violence (117). Despite gun control not preventing as much

gun violence as some would think, gun legislation does still have a moderate and

significant impact on gun violence as well as benefiting the US economy like Cook and

Leitzel proved.

Looking at the grand scheme of things, stricter gun control laws should be

enforced because of the shattering effects it has had on our nation, supporters of gun

control having better reasoning in their argument, and for benefiting and stabilizing the

economy. For all these reasons, gun control is in general better for society as a whole.

With stricter gun control, it is less likely for devastating tragedies similar to the

Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, the Colorado Movie Theatre, and the Sandy

Hook Elementary School shootings to occur. Also, for the most part, supporters of gun

control have weaker self-interest characteristics than the opposition. Supporters of gun

control tend to have more collectivist ideologies meaning that they take everyones well

being into consideration before their own. Since the gun market has been regulated

previously, if it all of sudden ceased to be, the economy could potentially suffer. All these

factors contribute to and prove the argument that stricter gun control should be enforced

in order to satisfy society as a whole instead of just certain groups of individuals. This

idea goes along with what Cook and Leitzel said in their study, There remains the

necessity of sorting through the costs and benefits to society of proposed regulations,

noting that infringement of privacy and individual freedom is a cost that must indeed be


10/12

Macias 10

given its proper due, There comes a point in life when as a responsible citizen of a

nation, both costs and benefits have to be weighed but wherein the benefits should

outweigh the costs in order to achieve what is ultimately best for society as a whole.

For the purpose of reducing gun violence in the United States future, immediate

legislation action is necessary. Legislation is the most logical way to ensure that gun

control applies to all gun owners. This legislation should include but not limited to bans

on military assault weapons, better execution of current laws, stricter background checks

and gun-trafficking laws. There is current gun legislation but this is evidently not enough

according to the recent gun violence occurring throughout our nation. By enforcing gun

laws, there will be a decrease in gun violence.

For centuries, gun violence has been a leading problem in the United States. As

mentioned before, the first recorded shooting happened in 1764. Despite the shooting

being considered minimal compared to recent school shootings, the fact that school

shootings are even being compared is not acceptable. Even though, mass shootings

should not have to be compared, they are and it is evident how times have become worse.

So much so that recent mass shootings have finally captivated the attention from some


11/12

Macias 11

opposition to gun control. The truth of the matter is that guns are dangerous and should

be regulated and monitored. It is now more than ever crucial to take action and enforce

stricter legislation in order to prevent future violence. This long overdue controversial

debate needs to solved once and for all.


12/12

Macias 12

Works Cited

Baker, Peter and Michael D Shear. Obama to Put Everything Ive Got Into Gun

Control.NYTimes.com.New York Times, 16 Jan. 2013. Web. 5 Feb. 2013.

Bennett, Katherine, John Kraft, and Deborah Grubb. University Faculty Attitudes

Toward Guns On Campus.Journal Of Criminal Justice Education 23.3 (2012):

336-355.Academic Search Complete. Web. 6 Mar. 2013.

Celinska, Katarzyna. "Individualism And Collectivism In America: The Case Of Gun

Ownership And Attitudes Toward Gun Control." Sociological Perspectives 50.2

(2007): 229-247.Academic Search Complete. Web. 12 Feb. 2013.

Cook, Philip J., and James A. Leitzel. "`Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy': An Economic

Analysis Of The Attack On Gun Control."Law & Contemporary Problems 59.1

(1996): 91-118.Academic Search Complete. Web. 10 Feb. 2013

Cooper, Michael. Debate on Gun Control is Revived, Amis Trend Toward Fewer

Restrictions.NYTimes.com.New York Times, 15 Dec. 2012. Web. 16 Feb. 2013.

Ellison, Christopher G. Southern Culture And Firearms Ownership. Social Science

Quarterly (University Of Texas Press) 72.2 (1991): 267-283.Academic Search

Complete. Web. 6 Mar. 2013.

Moorhouse, John C., and Brent Wanner. "Does Gun Control Reduce Crime Or Does

Crime Increase Gun Control?." CATO Journal26.1 (2006): 103-124.Academic

Search Complete. Web. 16 Feb. 2013.

Wolpert, Robin M., and James G. Gimpel. "Self-Interest, Symbolic Politics, And Public

Attitudes Toward Gun Control."Political Behavior20.3 (1998): 241-262.

Academic Search Complete. Web. 18 Feb. 2013.

wrd 104-research paper

Documents