• If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!


Ksaun 4Guns Evaluation

Page history last edited by PBworks 15 years, 10 months ago


Just a heads up, when I read this paper I'm going to take the position as someone who knows nothing about regulation, guns and events involving guns. I've always been told, never assume that the reader knows anything about said activities. Always target your paper accordingly. I know the target audience is college students, but even Sara pointed out that she in fact doesn't know much about it. So with that said, let's begin.

Regulation through Education


A gun is a weapon which has a mechanical attachment that activates an expansion of gases which in turn throws a projectile forward through a metal tube. Guns show no bias, so why should our society show one? We as people have made guns into what they are now and we--not the guns--are the only ones who can understand and accept responsibility. We as people use guns, whether it is for good or bad. Whatever the use, whatever happens is up to the person who pulls the trigger. “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” The problem is very clear, crime is caused by criminals. Not by law-abiding citizens, and as such, crimes involving guns are caused by criminals carrying firearms, not by law-abiding citizens carrying firearms.

I like the explanation of what a gun is, I think that's exactly how this paper should start off. However, I feel the sentence could have been simplified. In fact, I feel it's a run-on sentence. When you say we have made guns into what they are now.. what are they? I would have liked a bit more evidence behind this statement. I agree with the fact that the person behind the gun should be the one to blame for their actions-- not the actual weapon, nice formation as well. I wouldn't say the problem is THAT clear though, I feel that there is much more to this than criminals.. kids pull triggers, those that are desperate pull triggers. It comes down to what the driving force is behind the action. Some law-abiding citizens DO in fact pull triggers on others. People with completely clean slates can pull the trigger. Again, never assume.

In our World


Legitimacy; the state or quality of being legitimate. -Webster's


This definition holds the key in locking the doors shut from the criminal world. It has also proven throughout history that criminals have successfully found other means of getting what they search for. Supply and Demand, if someone wants it, then someone has it for sale. By banning guns you are removing a law abiding citizen's right to defend themselves with arguably one of the most successful means. The supports of banning firearms want to remove guns from our homes, so criminals are the only ones who have them. They want to take away our ability to use guns in self-defense, so criminals get the first draw. These supporters of the ban justify their rational by saying they are dangerous weapons. Well with their definition you would have to ban swords, knives, bats, rocks, whips, sling shots, Mike Tyson's teeth, and Jackie Chan's hands. A gun is only dangerous if the person handling the gun is looking to inflict harm on others. If there isn't a criminal, there isn't a crime.

Too quick of a transition for this paragraph. You go from explaining the key to ending gun violence to prohibition and then to supply and demand? A little to quick on the jump for that one, even if it was an introduction sentence. It could have used more padding, a lot more padding. Less situational, more facts.

Blast from the Past


Most people think that banning firearms in the United States is a viable solution to the high crime rate in the United States. This assumption is completely false. Look at some other substances that are also “prohibited” from being used. Marijuana for example is on of these substances. It is illegal to use, sell, or carry marijuana in most parts of the United States, but it is still fairly easy to get a hold of this plant. Most people can walk less than a block and find someone selling the drug. The fact that it is illegal does not deter people from obtaining and using the drug. The fact is that if the demand for a product is high enough, there will always be market to buy them. Firearms are not immune to this axiom.


An example of how banning items doesn’t work was the prohibition of alcohol from 1920 to 1933. During this time any type of drink that contained alcohol was banned from the market. Did this stop people from distributing and buying alcoholic beverages? The answer is no, people began to make it themselves, selling it, and raking in all the profits. Cities such as Chicago became notoriously known for disobeying the prohibition laws. Many of Chicago's most notorious gangsters, including Al Capone and his enemy Bugs Moran, made millions of dollars through illegal alcohol sales. By the end of the decade Capone controlled all 10,000 speakeasies (places that sold alcohol) in Chicago and was the front runner in the bootlegging business from Canada to Florida. Many other crimes, which included theft and murder, were directly connected to criminal activities in Chicago and elsewhere in violation of prohibition. In other words, the prohibition of one potentially destructive activity, drinking alcohol, created the conditions for a variety of destructive activities.

These two paragraphs should have came before the previous ones. You should have opened and stayed with prohibition for a bit before making that jump around in circles above these two paragraphs.


While banning may sound like a good idea, it is also taking away the rights of many Americans. When this country was established the founding fathers believed that the U.S. was the land of opportunity and freedom. Everyone has the right to defend himself and his or her property. Taking away personal firearms are just inhibiting people from defending themselves.


The only thing worse than a criminal with a gun is an untrained civilian attempting to use a gun. I agree that an untrained person attempting to use a gun can be unsafe and lethal. There are people all over the world that argue that guns are one of the worse inventions of man, however if there were an increase in regulations and education, usage of guns will be safer and will have a more positive affect in our lives.

Same as before, you should have done prohibition as a whole, rather than scenarios. I agree with most of the points proved in these two paragraph, very well articulated. A rough transition between the two paragraphs though.

As said earlier, most of the gun related crimes that takes place in the community are done with illegally attained weapons. Look at the usage of marijuana. It is an illegal substance that has been banned in most places in the United States due to the fact that we as a society think its a "gateway drug". If a person is caught with marijuana on their person, depending on the amount, can go to jail, pay a large fine, etc. But even with all the consequence people still go out and buy from the local dealers. Why? Why do people use this product even if it is illegal? The answer is because they can and it's easy to obtain. People like and do smoke cannabis, regardless of the ban. The government rules with an iron fist against the sale and usage of marijuana, but still the drug seems to trickle through the fingers and get into the hands of everyday people. So what going to be the difference between that and guns? If a person wants one badly enough, he or she is going to get it no matter what. So if bad people will still be able to get guns, what is the ordinary Joe going to do about it? If someone holds you up in an alley, you’re not going to be able to defend yourself with a shoe. Everyone has the right to self-defense, and the government wants to take one of our potential defenses away. It’s not right.

This seemed a bit more.. opinionated. While that's nice, it should go towards the end of the entire paper, in my opinion. It has good points, but where is the proof that the United States wants to take away everyone's guns? I believe they just want to get their hands on the illegally owned ones and not the ones that are properly cared for. Yes, anyone can get what they want when they want it-- but this should be at the end.

So it is unavoidable that people who desire to acquire a gun will find a way to do so, legally or illegally. So as more and more guns are available to the people of the community, the more opportunities that those people should be given to be educated. People who choose to own guns don't necessarily have to possess the intent to shoot and hurt others, but they could want to take part in recreational shooting, hunting, competition, gun collection, or just home safety. All in which the owner of the firearm needs to have some kind of basic knowledge of weaponry. They will need to be educated in the following: Safe firearm handling, firearm parts and operation, ammunition and its function, how to select, clean, and store a firearm, and lastly how to properly and accurately fire a weapon. I think that if those issued guns are required to attain those skills, they won’t be such a risk and danger to the community. Guns in the skilled and trained gives a sense of security and protection, but guns in the hands of the irresponsible and the reckless is a huge a risk. We should try to instill the desirable morals and ethics into the students of today’s high schools, so that by the time they are old enough to be eligible to acquire a gun, they will already have the right mind set.

Same points as above.


We believe that we should absolutely educate are youths about guns and gun safety. Youths and Parents alike should both be educated on the possible disasters, which could occur, if guns are misused or treated as toys. If someone wants to own a gun, they should implement a firearm safety and usage class, where people can be properly educated about the risks of not knowing how to use a handgun. Most accidents with guns happen because kids don't know how to handle them correctly. Maybe some good sound laws can promote better safety and decrease crime without conflicting with hunters and collectors.


After overlooking the facts of guns usage, looking back at our history, and using those facts in order to reach a solution which still permits us our rights and also keeps in mind the safety and security of our society we have taken the first steps in to keeping a gun safe community. By doing so we have assured gun enthusiasts that with the correct education and training they can defend themselves properly, instead of being caught dead with a shoe.

This second to last SHOULD have been at the top, it seems like a thesis to me.

The ending is a little lacking, and seems audience-oriented. Instead of it being targeted to one group, it should be open for anyone to appreciate.




Overall, I think it's a nice paper, but was unorganized (which is to be expected in my mind when more than one mind is working on the same thing, everyone wants to tweak it to where they will understand it. We kinda had that issue as well.). I think things could have been moved and some ides could have been dwelled on less. I saw a lack for the actual topic, education.. and more focus on criminals and illegal guns, so that confused me a bit. There wasn't much talk about the typical citizen, but all the blame and emphasis on criminals. Good research though, but definitely could have been compiled and pushed together more. Less repetition, while it's good there was a bit too much in here.

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.