Wednesday, January 29, 2020
United States Gun Control Essay Firearms restriction, commonly known as gun control, is a hotly debated subject in and out of the political arena. Advocacy groups propose more restrictions, tighter restraints and harsher punishments for offenses. These proponents claim that violence stems from guns and gun owners, gun manufacturers and gun supporters are to blame. Opposition groups to gun control suggest that lesser restrictions, greater availability of different types of firearms and more moderate punishments should be put in place. History and Background 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 in fringed. This is the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. With this single sentence, laws, debates, fights and controversies have begun, ended and are still being fought. Gun control can be defined as government limitation of the purchase and ownership of firearms. In the early days of our country there was little gun control. Guns were used both as protection from Indian incursions as well as tools for hunting. It wasnt until 1934 with the National Firearms Act, passed by Franklin D. Roosevelt, which prohibited the sale and manufacture of automatic-fire weapons like machine guns, short-barreled shotguns and rifles, parts of guns like silencers, asÃ well as other gadget-type firearms hidden in canes.(Spitzer 141) This act came about from the lawlessness and rise of gangster culture during prohibition. The most controversial piece of legislation was passed in 1968. called the Gun Control Act, this act expanded licensing requirements to include more dealers, and more de tailed record keeping. Handgun sales over state lines were restricted, as well as the list of persons that dealers couldnt sell to grew to include those convicted of felonies (with some exceptions) mentally incompetent, or drug users.(Spitzer 142) The main purpose of the bill was to eliminate the sale of firearms through the mail, or mail-order guns. Up until this time, customers only had to sign a statement that they were over the age of 21 in order to purchase a handgun and 18 for rifle or shotgun. It wasnt until 1994 that the next two major pieces of gun restriction legislation were passed. The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, simply the Brady Act, and the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, commonly known as the assault-weapons ban. The Brady Act imposed a five day waiting period and mandatory background check before a licensed dealer could sell a handgun to a licensed customer. Also, there was the new FBI run National Instant Criminal Background Check System. This system was in place on Nov. 30, 1998 and applies to all firearm sales. It allowed background checks to be done over the phone or electronically with most results returned immediately. Spitzer describes the Assault-Weapons Ban being passed in order to ban the manufacture, possession, and importation of new semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition feeding devices.(152) This means that a large number of semi-automatic rifles were prohibited along with magazines that held over 30 rounds of ammunition. Finally it prohibited juveniles from possessing or selling handguns. In 2002 the Justice Department, under Attorney General John Ashcroft, indicated that it interpreted the Second Amendment as supporting the rights of individuals to possess and bear arms for protection as well as recreation and collection.(Norquist 1) the history of gun control is long and complicated, with recent tendencies swinigin toward more relaxed controls. Pro-Gun Control In recent years, gun control activists, that is, those in favor of more restrictions, have grown and been favored by the media. Some of these groups include handgun Control, Inc., the National Coalition to Ban Handguns, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Violence, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, Mothers Against Violence in America and the international Stop Handgun Violence.(Carter 75) With increasing media attention with more and more school shootings, proponents of gun control legislation have often held that only federal laws can be effective. If not, states with few restrictions will continue to be sources of guns that flow illegally into states with more restrictions. These groups believe that the Second Amendment is obsolete, or is intended solely to guard against suppression of state militias by the central government. They ask why a private citizen needs any firearm that is not designed primarily for hunting or other recognized sporting purposes. One mans answer to this question was There is no tradition of civilians owning assault-type guns'(Edel 75) while another man states after much thought, I can see no justification for me or others like me to own a paramilitary assault rifle.(Edel 76) Many proponents of firearm restrictions have advocated policy changes on specific types of firearms or components that appear to be useful primarily for criminal purposes or purposes that pose unusual risks to the public. Fully automatic firearms and short-barreled rifles and shotguns have been subject to strict regulation since 1934. Fully automatic firearms have been banned from private possession since 1986, except for those legally owned and registered with the Secretary of the Treasury on May 19, 1986, the day the ban was passed.(Spitzer 139) The proponents of gun control have presented a strong and sol id case. Many firmly believe that guns should be banned throughout the country. Anti-Gun Control Opponents of gun control vary in their positions with respect to specific forms of control. Generally, they hold that gun control laws do not accomplish what is intended. Many argue that it is as difficult to keep weapons from being acquired by high risk individuals, even under federal laws and strict enforcement. In their view, a more stringent federal firearmÃ regulatory system would only create problems for law-abiding citizens, bring mounting frustration and escalation of bans by gun regulators, and possibly threaten citizens civil rights or safety. The group leading the battle against gun control is the National Rifle Association, or the NRA. The NRA started as an organization to promote the practice of target shooting. After World War II, while the social outlook on firearms became increasingly negative, the NRA focused its energies on anti-gun control. Using their newly formed ILA (Institute for Legislative Action) the NRA lobbied politicians and inundated the media with literature and facts about the Second Amendment and how those rights were being infringed. Gun control opponents also reject the assumption that the only legitimate purpose of ownership by a private citizen is recreational. (i. e., hunting and target-shooting)(Carter 81) Carter also points out that those opponents insist on the continuing need of people for effective means to defend person and property, and they point to studies that they believe show that gun possession lowers the incidence of crime.(85) Andrews sums up the difference in stance between Red (Republican and pro-gun) and Blue (Democrat and anti-gun) States. He says [t]his is why the Second Amendment is so bothersome to Blue America. The right to bear arms is the right to take a stand, to act on the belief that you are right and someone else is wrong, and as such it is a threat to the amoral collectivism that the New Left embodies.(2) Here, Andrews explains that many anti-gun control activists view the issue from a moral standpoint where the gun control advocates view the issue from an incorrect interests viewpoint. Some opponents believe further that the Second Amendment includes a right to keep arms as a defense against potential government tyranny, pointing to examples in other countries of the use of firearm restrictions to curb dissent and secure illegitimate government power. Whatever the case, the peoples leading the fight against the control and legislation against guns carry on and never give up. They believe morally and strongly that gun control is much too restrictive and infringes upon rights given them by the Constitution. Summary The debate over gun control has been hard fought and intense. To gun controlÃ advocates, the opposition is out of touch with the times, misinterprets the Second Amendment, or is lacking in concern for the problems of crime and violence. To gun control opponents, advocates are naive in their faith in the power of regulation to solve social problems, bent on disarming the American citizen for ideological or social reasons, or moved by irrational hostility to firearms and gun enthusiasts. Guns dont kill people, people kill people.(NRA Slogan, 1980-Present) Works Cited Andrews, Ned. Why Guns Matter. The American Enterprise 01 Sep. 2002: 9+. Bijlefeld, Marjolijn. People For and Against Gun Control. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1999. Carter, Gregg Lee. The Gun Control Movement. New York: Twayne Publishers, 1997 Cothran, Helen, ed. Opposing Viewpoints: Gun Control. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2003. Edel, Wilbur. Gun Control: Threat to Liberty or Defense Against Anarchy. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger Publishers, 1995. LaPierre, Wayne R. Guns, Crime, and Freedom. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 1994. Norquist, Grover. Lesons of the Fall. The American Enterprise 01 Jan. 2003: 13. Spitzer, Robert J. The Politics of Gun Control. Chatham, New Jersey: Chatham House Publishers, Inc., 1995. The Definition of an Issue: United States Gun Control
Tuesday, January 21, 2020
Like Water for Chocolate and One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich Ã Like Water for Chocolate (LWC) written by Laura Esquivel and One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich (ODLID) written by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, are two very different types of novels with more evident discrepancies than similarities. The first novel LWC, splendidly illustrates the life of a young Mexican campesina named Tita whom lives under the authoritarian rule of her mother. The second novel ODLID, originally a Russian publication, demonstrates the life and hardships of a middle-aged man named Ivan Denisovich in a Soviet work camp in Siberia. The themes revolve around both protagonists, Tita and Ivan, whom each set the overall tone of the novels. The dominant theme in both novels is the oppression the protagonists are exposed to on a daily basis. Consequently, the characters and the plots also incorporate aspects of oppression such as parental censorship and personal ill treatment. The characters, theme, and plots correlate with one another and also are associated with the cultural background of each novel, ODLID from Russia and LWC from Mexico. The influence culture has on the development of the characters, theme, and plots sets the stage for apparent similarities and differences between both novels. Ã The primary examples of cultural influences in LWC and in ODLID, are the mindsets of the protagonists. The cultures influence the rather listless conduct of the protagonists by establishing precincts that cripple their inner aspirations. Initially, Tita's conduct is influenced by the Mexican culture. She demonstrates a submissive behavior towards her mother. This is explained by Mexican culture of the early nineteen ... ...al influences. In LWC, the Mexican culture plays huge role in the novel introducing the reader to a unique lifestyle packed with cooking, love affairs, attractive dramas, and oppressed dreams. In ODLID, the Russian culture also flavors the novel by creating a very vapid and listless stage on which Ivan Denisovich's daily routine is delineated as realistic as possible. It would be tedious to point out all the ways, in which culture influences each novel, but it is important to take into account the prominent role culture plays in the formation of the individual novels. Like Water for Chocolate (LWC) written by Laura Esquivel and One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich (ODLID) written by Alexander Solzhenitsyn do not only exemplify great pieces of literature, instead they also serve as tools to map out and comprehend the cultures they were built upon. Ã
Monday, January 13, 2020
Ã¢â¬Å"Which is more important freedom or happinessÃ¢â¬ (Nijinsky 78). Every human has their own definition for Ã¢â¬Å"happinessÃ¢â¬ and Ã¢â¬Å"freedomÃ¢â¬ , and thatÃ¢â¬â¢s what Armstrong and BZRK cooperationÃ¢â¬â¢s are fighting for. The Armstrong family fought for ultimate happiness, while BZRK fought for people right and freedom. Characters in this novel were willing to die for freedom and they were also willing to kill for freedom. This novel demonstrates the emerging technologies and makes you think about the implication they may represent in society. It raises questions such as Ã¢â¬Å"Is freedom something worth fighting for? Ã¢â¬ The theme is freedom, and itÃ¢â¬â¢s required for happiness, in BZRK by Michael Grant it convincingly demonstrates through madness, achieving potential, and sanity. Through the character isolation due to their restrictions, they demonstrate that you need freedom to achieve more happiness. Due to the ArmstrongÃ¢â¬â¢s isolation because of their isolation, they are forcing their will to create a collective human identity. During a conversation between the Armstrong brotherÃ¢â¬â¢s and their followers Ã¢â¬Å"they are ruthless in a demonic cause, we will unite humanityÃ¢â¬ (Benjamin Armstrong 66). This helps connect with the outer world as they see and hear about leaders that are imposing their will and taking peopleÃ¢â¬â¢s freedom. Later on in the novel, the reader discovers that Vincent is diagnosed with the disease that makes him unable to feel happiness. Then later on when he defeats the Armstrong brothers, he was able to achieve happiness. He always has a look of disgust but later on the look is surpassedÃ¢â¬ (Sadie 155). This situation helps the reader visualise the unhappiness in the character because of the inability to achieve freedom. Through lifetime of experiences the potential achieved freedom allows us to live a happy fulfilling life. As a result of his freedom being taken away Alex failed to reach his potential to reach his full potential in the army and was handcuffed in a mental Asylum. AlexÃ¢â¬â¢s brother describes Alex situation Ã¢â¬Å"Alex Cotton was in a room and sat on the edge of the bunk. His wrists were handcuffed to steal ringsÃ¢â¬ (Noah 5). This helps the reader associate the prisoners to a lack of freedom and lack of achieved potentials in a variety of all sorts. Likewise, because of Anthony being locked up in his own imagination he wasnÃ¢â¬â¢t able to reach his full potential and was satisfied in being a mass murderer. In a confrontation with Burnofsky Ã¢â¬Å"I just rewire people brains. You think I wonÃ¢â¬â¢t rewire my own if needed! (Anthony 188). This showed the reader a lot about the character of Anthony and that he is willing to do anything to satisfy the Armstrong brotherÃ¢â¬â¢s Through the sanity of major characters in BZRK, it help it them reach their ultimate goal which was to achieve their freedom. Do to Greg Mclure sanity he was able to create nanobot technology in hope to win battle against the Armstrong family. During a conversation with Anthony Ã¢â¬Å"Burnofsky remember the day he spent with Grey Mclure working in the lab on the nanobotsÃ¢â¬ (Michael Grant 124). This shows the reader that Greg always uses his intelligent to reach his potential and that helps him fight for his freedom against the Armstrong family. Similarly, Vincent always used his freedom of choice and his intelligent to become the best nanobot fighter. In a battle between Vincent and Anthony Ã¢â¬Å"he will find something wrong, he is too smart to fall for this trickÃ¢â¬ (Anthony 178). Likewise, this shows how Vincent sanity help it him excel in what he does and also help it him finally finding pleasure in his life. In conclusion, the theme is freedom is required for happiness, and itÃ¢â¬â¢s demonstrated through madness, achieving potential, and sanity. Firstly, through character isolation due to their appearance and sickness it shows that you need freedom to achieve happiness in life. Secondly, through lifelong experiences the potential achieving helps you live a long fulfilling life. Lastly, sanity helps the character achieve his ultimate goal which was to gain freedom. So, why is freedom worth fighting for? It matters a great deal to everyone one in the world. Freedom brings progress, opportunity, and happiness into people lives.
Sunday, January 5, 2020
Changing Rights and Freedoms of Aboriginal People The rights and freedoms of Aboriginal people have changed significantly during the 20th century after facing many years of neglect and inequalities. In that time, change in indigenous rights and freedoms was brought about as a result of government policies, political activism and legal changes. Government Policies changed the rights and freedoms of the Aboriginal people. The policy of protectionism was introduced in 1869 which wanted to protect Aboriginals from the effects of violence, diseases and exploitation as a result of European settlement. The policy was based on a certainty that Aboriginal people were doomed to extinction and should be given some protection to live out theirÃ¢â¬ ¦show more contentÃ¢â¬ ¦Political activism in Australia was a major factor achieving changing rights and freedoms for Aboriginals people because of this indigenous people were able to take action to rise up for their opinions. The evidence for legal changes in the indigenous peopleÃ¢â¬â¢s rights and freedom was the result of the 1967 referendum. The referendum was held to change the Australian Constitution to count the Aboriginal people in census as a part of the Australian population and allow the Commonwealth government make laws to help improve conditions for Aboriginal people no matter where they lived in Australia. As indicated in Source B the white population insisted to vote yes in the referendum and acknowledge indigenous Australians. A change in the law was needed to equalize indigenous Australians and therefore consider them as part of our society. The powers given to the Federal government by this referendum enabled Gough Whitlam to introduce reforms such as indigenous land rights and equality of women. The change in legal affairs for the indigenous was a result of the change in rights and freedoms. Throughout the 19th century white settlers moved the Aboriginal people off their land and into reserves. This resulted in Aboriginal people experiencing dispossession, which meant that they didnÃ¢â¬â¢t exist. In the early 1970s the Whitlam government began to work onShow MoreRelatedChanging Environment Of Women s Rights And The Paradox Of Sexual Freedom1458 Words Ã |Ã 6 PagesChanging Environment in relation to sex and relationshi Although the popular talk of women rights and freedom in the society does help women in certain degree to develop a sense of control and success in recent years, the topics of sex and relationships remain controversial and shameful to talk about. In Ã¢â¬Å"Selections from Hard to Get: Twenty-something Women and the Paradox of Sexual FreedomÃ¢â¬ , Leslie Bell discovers in her experiments and interviews that despite the choices of freedom and explorationRead MoreHistory Course Outline787 Words Ã |Ã 4 PagesHistory Course Outline There are four topics; * Australia in the Vietnam War Era * Changing Rights and Freedoms * People Power and Politics in the Post-war Period * AustraliaÃ¢â¬â¢s Social and Cultural History in the Post-War Period Australia in the Vietnam War Inquiry questions Ã¢â¬ ¢ How did the Australian government respond to the threat of communism after WWII? Ã¢â¬ ¢ Why did Australia become involved in the Vietnam War? Ã¢â¬ ¢ How did various groups respond to AustraliaÃâs involvement inRead MoreThe Importance Of Freedom Of Expression817 Words Ã |Ã 4 Pagesever-changing world where media is growing day by day. Rules must change to agree with the ever-changing media and the effects of it. With all this comes the question of how far and how much should media be regulated without neglecting them of their rights. Some would say that the government has put too much regulation on the media while others may think that media needs more regulation. We must also acknowledge the Citizens freedom of expression and what the people can do with those rights. In thisRead MoreMy Reflection Of Freedom1273 Words Ã |Ã 6 PagesReflection Journal #1 Freedom is something that is usually thought about as having the ability to do whatever one wants to do. Of course, that is correct in the literal sense but, to me freedom can mean much more. To me freedom allows me to be myself in every way possible and it means that I can choose my own path in life, choose my own beliefs and values, and choose what I do with my relatively brief time on Earth. What freedom means is dependent on where you live, who you are, and how you wereRead MoreFreedom Rewritten722 Words Ã |Ã 3 PagesW-130 15 September 2015 Freedom Rewritten Our freedom is limited because we mistakenly misunderstood what the right to be free meant. Thomas JeffersonÃ¢â¬â¢s, Ã¢â¬Å"The Declaration of Independence,Ã¢â¬ argues in his 1776 draft that if the government goes against what people want, they have a right to rebel and form a new type of government. As well as, if there is an unbalanced amount of respect, we the people are turned down the right to a full voice and the activation of our rights. With that being said,Read MoreThe Debate On Banning Religious Symbols969 Words Ã |Ã 4 Pages We know all of Canada to be a place where everyone can be comfortable in their own skin. Our country is a place of diversity and has not changed until a province like Quebec wants to turn away from our multiculturalism and change the Charter of Rights to please themselves, but why? The question is if religious symbols take an impact on society in a positive or negative way? Quebec might say that since multiculturalism became a part of our country that it has destroyed the tradition of what CanadaRead MoreThe American Dream955 Words Ã |Ã 4 Pagesyou have the same rights and decisions as someone who is a successful American citizen? These decisions include choices you make in order to better yourself in life, whether it has to do with your choice in career, or what you want to do in life. Making decisions, and having choices comes with freedom, as a person, and that reflects on being an American everywhere in the world, even though youÃ¢â¬â¢ve never been in America. To be an American means that you have the freedom, and rights to do what you wantRead More Separation of Church and State Essay examples988 Words Ã |Ã 4 PagesÃ¢â¬Å"Religious Right groups are crowing and insisting that they have some sort of mandated to make their repressive agenda the law of the land,Ã¢â¬ however, we no longer live in the 1700Ã¢â¬â¢s (13). Times are changing and America is no longer predominantly white, Christians. In order for America to remain the melting pot we are all so proud of, we must accommodate all beliefs. A separation between church and state is necessary if America wants to give all of its citizens their religious rights. Read MoreReconstruction Of The Reconstruction Era1587 Words Ã |Ã 7 PagesReconstruction; providing justice for freedmen and facilitating national reconciliation. (A New Birth of Freedom, pg. 1) After the 12 year span, reconstructing the nation succeeded in only a few of the goals that were set out to achieve within those 12 years that it was in progress. The ReconstructionÃ¢â¬â¢s intentions ended up becoming its own failure. It was the failure that brought forth the foreseeable success in changing the South. There were three goals the reconstruction set, and failed to achieve; social,Read MoreA Case study on the role of Internet Intermediates in Internet Freedom of Expression1195 Words Ã |Ã 5 Pagesplay an essential role in the free flow of information vie Internet, because those platforms enables users to access, share and create information which implicate the right of freedom of expression. Under the economic motivations, policy principles for Internet intermediary platforms are not just take account of expression of freedom on the Internet, which also be influenced by related laws and local police. In general, Internet intermediary platforms appropriate usesÃ¢â¬â¢ involvement and collaboration