L3-S5 - PPP et Expression orale - résumé - GUN Control PDF

Preview

Summary

Download L3-S5 - PPP et Expression orale - résumé - GUN Control PDF

Description

L3 LLCE Anglais – S5 Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne

Initiation à la recherche Synthèse de PPP et expression orale

Table des matières Introduction............................................................................................................................................2 Conclusion............................................................................................................................................14 Bibliographie........................................................................................................................................15

Page 1 sur 17

Introduction The topic of Gun Control is one of the sensitive subjects that divides America the most. There are two major sides : those who are pro-gun control and those who are against. A third camp can be added: those who want to keep the ownership of guns but regulate the purchase of firearms. Many associations were created, such as the NRA (the National Rifle Association, founded on November 16th, 1871, in Virginia, is a nonprofit organization that advocates for gun rights) or the hashtag #NeverAgain (it is a committee led by American students, their goal is to prevent gun violence, they started to gather after the shooting of February 14th, 2018 in a Floridian high school). It is a constant fight between the two principal camps but also with the Government. When the Second Amendment was written by the Founding Fathers, all Americans needed a gun, they thought it was a good idea to protect the people against tyranny and criminals, and that the society could grow without any issues. But problems began to appear. People began to use guns for wrong reasons, more and more deaths where provoked by firearms. Those who lost a friend or a member of their family wanted reparation, justice or the abolition of the right to own guns. How did half of the American population come to think that the possession of firearms should no longer be a fundamental right ? First, we can wonder why the Second Amendment is always quoted and discussed when it comes to that matter. Then, America is presented as a divided nation because of this issue. And at last, guns are seen as a danger but also as a mean for one to defend himself or the other.

Page 2 sur 17

1. THE SECOND AMENDMENT. 1.1. THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION, A PILLAR FOR THE NATION. The United States Constitution was created on September 17, 1787 and ratified on September 18, 1788. It is the oldest constitution still used in the world and its first part is called the Bill of Rights. This document is the most important document for American people because their country is built on these laws. This document is a pillar for the American Nation, and a very respected document all over the country. The Founding Fathers made sure of its quality and based the whole system and government on it. Any law that isn’t conform to the constitution cannot hold in the judicial and federal system, as it would be considered as an “unconstitutional law”, therefore, repealed. The Bill of Rights is made of seven amendments and the one which is important for us to mention is the second one which protect the right of people to keep and bear arms. It was adopted on December 15, 1791 and it says : « 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. »

1.2. THE SECOND AMENDMENT, ROOT OF THE PROBLEM. For many citizens of the Unites States, it cannot be changed because it is an amendment which is part of their liberties and if it was to be modified, every other amendment could be modified too. The idea of changing document with such a federal importance is disturbing for many citizens. Due to its importance, this amendment is quoted in every document that we had studied in class. In the first document, it is said that several states, such as Iowa, allow blind people to carry guns because of this amendment while they are not allowed to drive. The second document is a radio program discussing this amendment and explaining what can be legally done. In the third document, which is about a protest outside the National Rifle Association annual meeting camp after the Parkland shooting, Page 3 sur 17

Marion P. Hammer had been approached by a journalist of the show to talk about gun legislation. She is a powerful advocate of the NRA and she was president of it from 1995 to 1998. She says that « you have to have some evidence before you take constitutional right away from people », showing the importance of this amendment in the debate. And finally, the fourth document is a discussion about a survey that questions American citizens about new laws which could respect the second amendment, while preventing dangerous people to bear arms. It is based on a declaration of Barack Obama who said that gun owners in the USA also want stricter law for guns. Indeed, gun violence doesn’t help their case and their image, making them look bad.

1.3. TOWARDS A MODIFICATION OF THE CONSTITUTION ? The document which talks mainly about the second amendment is the second explaining how it can be interpreted. Especially with the terms « well-regulated militia » which can be interpreted not as usual citizens but according to some historians as the National Guard. As the existence of this amendment is questioned, we can wonder if there is a way to suppress or modify the Constitution and there is. Indeed, the Founding Fathers added it at the end of the Constitution. This is the complicated process for that you have to follow when you want to change it. First, super majorities in the United States Congress is needed representing two third in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. And then the new amendment needs to be ratified by three fourth of the states (38 states on 50) to be accepted. And the interviewee explains that it happens only once in the last 40 years.

Page 4 sur 17

2. THE DIVISION OF A NATION. 2.1. THE ANTI-GUN AND PRO-CONTROL ARGUMENT. Americans are very divided on the controversy of guns rights, and the subject is one of the biggest debates in the United States of America. A lot of people are anti-gun; therefore, they want more control when it comes to the purchase of firearms and ammunitions. In the first document, it is said that blind people can have guns in some states. Pro-gun lobbyists consider that it is a right for everyone and a question of equality, but anti-gun activists point out the danger of such a right for blind people. Due to their disability, blind people can’t aim properly, so they are a danger for both themselves and other people. Another big argument against guns is the danger they represent for children and teenagers. Indeed, mass shootings in schools are a big problem in the United States, and not only in states where the gun legislation is indulgent. Guns are not toys and shouldn’t be accessible to children at home, neither to teenagers who can steal it from their parents and commit murderous acts in their school. In 2017, there were 65 shootings in American schools. Page 5 sur 17

For example, the third document mentions the mass shooting of Parkland Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, on February 14th, 2018. Reducing guns in circulation would reduce the amount of mass shootings in America, according to gun control advocacy groups, such as “Never Again MSD” or “Stop Handgun Violence”. Obviously, they suggest that less guns in circulation and that would mean less death by firearms in the whole country. Guns would be more difficult to find on the black market and less easy to steal in order to be used against other people. Gun violence cost a lot of money to the government of the United States, because the country needs more police officers that you have to train and pay. Every year, the cost grows according to the law center : “Researchers conservatively estimate that gun violence costs the American economy at least $229 billion every year, including $8.6 billion in direct expenses such as for emergency and medical care”

2.2. THE PRO-GUN AND ANTI-CONTROL ARGUMENT There is another side to the debate, as shown in the fourth document : people who are pro-guns and who can sometimes be purely and simply against any form of control when it comes to gun ownership or purchase. They have several arguments to prove their point, and have several groups who advocate their cause, such as the NRA for example. First, many pro-gun people use economics to support their point. Indeed, around 10 000 different types of jobs are related to the gun industry, which represents almost 8.5 million dollars. But the argument doesn’t stop there, because they also present guns as a way of defending themselves, something that gives them the possibility to stand against tyranny if necessary. The Second Amendment is seen as a sacred way of preserving freedom in America, as the Founding Fathers wrote. The idea of “non-intervention” of the state in people’s business is a widespread philosophy in the United States, especially among the Libertarian Page 6 sur 17

and Republican parties. Many states considered as the freest states have only a few gun control laws, such as in Arizona or Alaska. With this idea of the constitution and government being “of the people, by the people, for the people”, many American citizens stand for the phrase “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun”. Indeed, many people keep guns at home thinking of a possible situation when self-defense would be needed, such as an intruder or a burglar. Some states have a law called “The Stand-yourground law”, which allow someone to use lethal force without legal repercussion if one feels threatened. “Gun don’t kill, people do”, here is a very common sentence used to counter-attack gun-control laws. Indeed, they think that the person who commits a murder is to be blamed, instead of the firearms that cannot function on itself. The question “If someone drank and killed someone on the road, is it the car’s fault ? Is it the alcohol’s fault ? Or the person’s fault ?” is also used as a comparison, and the failure of the Prohibition is often brought up to show that prohibiting something doesn’t work, because it encourages the development of a parallel economy or of a black market. Even if guns were illegal, they would be sold illegally to criminals by other criminals, which is already the case in most countries. Many pro-gun activists give France as an example, where many shootings occurred those past years, despite the harsh gun laws in the whole country. Furthermore, legislation already exists in some states across America. For example, as it is said in the first document, background checks are mandatory, and criminals are not allowed to purchase guns. In the third document, Marion Hammer, current president of the NRA (National Rifle Association), advocate the necessity of a better enforcement of existing laws instead of the creation of a harsher legislation. Pro-gun groups pretend that only 10% of crimes are committed with weapons that have been purchased legally. Crimes tend to be committed with firearms purchased on the black market, stolen, imported, etc. There is also the obvious statement that one can kill with something else Page 7 sur 17

than guns. In 2017, more than 3080 crimes were committed with something else than firearms.

But the amount of murders by firearms is still very high in the US, way ahead of other weapons, and that is why the Second Amendment is being discussed and debated a lot.

3. DANGER AND DEFENSE AS SYNONYMS OF GUNS. 3.1. SELF-DEFENSE, A VERY MEANINGFUL IDEA FOR AMERICANS. Guns are often seen as a way to defend yourself. Some people think that it's a mean to defend your family in a case of attack or burglary, as said by pro-gun advocacy groups. Page 8 sur 17

Protection is an important value for gun owners in the United States, even more in cities like Saint Louis, Detroit or the New Orleans, where the rate of criminality is very high. According to the Pew Research Center : 48 percent of gun owners say they own a gun mainly for protection. But for years, experts have been divided over how often people actually use guns in self-defense. The numbers range from the millions to hundreds of thousands, depending on whom you ask. The latest data show that people use guns for self-defense only rarely. According to a Harvard University analysis of figures from the National Crime Victimization Survey, people defended themselves with a gun in nearly 0.9 percent of crimes from 2007 to 2011.

3.1.1. The influence of guns The presence of more guns doesn't mean that people can defend themselves even more, but it means that more guns are present in the houses of people, that is to say within anybody's reach. A child can have access to a gun while he is searching for his cuddly toy. Accidents arrive quickly. Then, the presence of guns doesn't only mean that everybody is safe, the only thought to know that a gun is present in a house can influence somebody. Anyone can take the arm by an impetus of madness.

Page 9 sur 17

3.1.2. Gang wars, responsible of many deaths with firearms. Guns are easily accessible in some states where guns are less controlled, for example in Arizona. In Texas, the bearing of a firearm is authorized. The easy access of firearms can encourage a person to buy a gun even if he has no reason to buy one. Moreover, the free access to guns encourages malevolent people to buy a firearm. In Cleveland, in Atlanta or also in Los Angeles, gangs are present in a great number. Gang wars and shootings take place every day, people can die because they are crossing the street at the wrong time, mothers and fathers lose their children because they let themselves be dragged into bad plans.

Page 10 sur 17

3.2. THE VIOLENCE OF MASS SHOOTINGS. Gang members are not the only one who bring violence. Sometimes, only one person can do much more damage than one hundred persons. Mass shootings can be the consequences of this violence. The case of shootings in school is more and more frequent. According to the website EveryTown, there have been 290 schools shooting since 2013. And according to the article dated November 8, 2018 from the website Business Insider France, there have been 307 mass shootings in 2018. TIME examined the reports on the 86 attacks in EveryTown’s data since 2013 that are categorized as “Attack on other persons(s) resulting in injury or death,” not including those that occurred on college campuses. We considered a school shooting to meet the following definition: -

At least one victim was injured or killed

-

Either the shooter or at least one of the victims was a student or teacher

-

The attack occurred on school property, including the parking lot, though not necessarily during school hours.

-

Injuries are counted only if they resulted from gunfire, not the ensuing chaos.

The website Gun Violence Archive makes an inventory of all the mass shootings happening in 2018. They also create a map with the places where the shootings happened :

Page 11 sur 17

3.3. THE REASONS AND THE SOLUTIONS TO THE NATIONAL PROBLEM. In the third document studied in class, the recording relates the mass shooting which took place in Parkland Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida on February 14th, 2018. Seventeen students and staff members were killed by a former student. A reporter who spoke in the document said “They have no concerns for safety of people on the street. Their only concern is more guns on the street and chaos”. Many people as this man blamed the NRA saying that the organization was responsible for the shooting because they support gun owners. The interviewee of the recording maintains that there are no reasons to blame the NRA. According to her, the root of the problems which really explains gun violence is the breakdown of families. She means that it is the fault of parents because they don't raise their children properly or because children grow with no guide, no example to follow. Her idea is to prevent certain persons to have firearms. Everybody (including the NRA) wants to prevent criminals, mentally ill peoples, individuals with a propensity to violence, etc. to get weapons. In 1968, guns restrictions were taken, drugs addicts and criminals (who passed more than a year in jail) were targeted. Not only the criminals are targeted for gun prevention, but some people also think that blind people shouldn't have the right to bear a firearm. The first document studied in class highlights an important question: “Why is America giving gun licenses to blind people ?”. In the second amendment, nothing states that blind people don't have the right to buy or to bear an arm. But certain people oppose that opinion, they say that it's a fundamental right to have a gun. Their main argument is equality and freedom, the right to defend themselves from danger too. We find also people who don't want to eradicate firearms from the American soil, but who want to put some restrictions on the purchase of a gun anyway. Some types of restrictions Page 12 sur 17

come back frequently, the ideal solution would be to establish background checking as psychological tests (mental ability tests and personality tests), physical ability tests, eyesight tests, etc. An idea which is often recurring to replace guns is the establishment of a militia which would protect the population. According to the second document, the Second Amendment could be only stating that a well-established militia had the duty to defend the population, such as the National Guard for example, which exist since the creation of the United States of America. But this idea was denied by the Supreme Court, which confirmed the right for individuals to “bear and keep arms”, as the Constitution says. That didn’t help to calm the intensity of the debate, which is still going on nowadays. As shown in the last document, many activists don’t believe in this federal decision, therefore they are determined to change things at a state level or even at a local level, like in Oregon.

Page 13 sur 17

Conclusion

As a conclusion, firearms have a place in American society thanks to the Second Amendment because they feel they have the right to own guns in order to protect themselves. Those who support gun ownership want to feel safe at home or even outside. Those that support gun control only see the raise of crime rate in the United States and think that gun laws are the responsible of that. The constant and easy access to firearms is a main issue for the Government. American people think that laws about gun control are ineffective. They want to change things. Some stores like Walmart are attacked in rapid succession and the rate of death is increasing. Although, the United States is a nation who believed in the carry of arms. The statistics show that the number of civilians who have guns in the United States are equal to the total of the half world number. The Government needs to decrease gun violence and increase gun control at the same time as they maintain the citizens' rights from the Second Amendment.

Page 14 sur 17

Bibliographie The Constitution, Gun Freedom and Restriction Laws in the US : National Center for Constitutional Studies, “Bill of Rights”, consulté le 10 décembre 2018

“Eight facts about Gun Control in the US”, consulté le 13 décembre 2018

GRANLUND Dave, Cartoon “Iowa Guns for blind”, consulté le 7 décembre 2018

RUGER, William & SOREN, Jason, “Freedom in the 50 states” Cato Institute, 2018, consulté le 25 septembre 2018

SJERVEN, Jay, “U.S. Congress girds for contentious farm bill conference”, 24.08.2018, consulté le 16 septembre 2018

YEAGER, Ashley, The kid and the gun pictures, “Latest stats are just a start in preventing gun injuries in kids”, Science News 26.06.2017, consu...