Research Questions and Ideas
Why is there so much gun violence in our society? Will gun violence ever be eradicated? Do laws against guns help to eliminate gun violence? In the research, gun violence is considered a public health epidemic by many medical practitioners, but its effects can be felt across the health and human care sectors. From murders to mass shootings and suicides, gun violence is an especially alarming concern in the United States, which has the highest rate of homicides linked to weapons among industrialized countries. On the other hand, gun violence has a far-reaching effect that reaches beyond those who have been personally impacted. The recent move by Texas to have a bill allowing for open carrying of handguns raises questions on whether it is a positive or negative gesture.
Despite many people losing their lives to gun-related crimes, the phenomena affect society in myriad ways, including rising fear, the medical cost of shooting, victims’ loss of income, and other indirect challenges. Apart from the economic cost, society experiences fractured families, communities, and neighborhoods. The loss of parents leads to children growing up without proper nurturing, predisposing them to a myriad of problems. Psychologic issues such as anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and depression are some of the challenges such children can face. In addition, the children grow up with bitterness, which can compel them to revenge for their parents, leading to crime and possible death or jail term. However, the black population seems to be the most affected. The rate of how black people are convicted compared to others for gun-related crimes is astonishing. The mass incarceration of people from selected groups exposes the selective application of rules by the criminal justice system. Is the law set up to condemn certain people while benefiting others?
Annotated Bibliography
Densely, James, and Jillian Peterson. “Gun Violence in America.” The Violence Project, 2017.
In the article, the authors examine the issue of gun violence in America in its entirety from the history to the current prevalence. Densely and Peterson argue that gun-related crimes are directly linked to the constitutional provisions. The Second Amendment allows people to hold guns for defense and self-defense. Since there has never been a clear interpretation of the law, gun ownership in America had increased tremendously, allowing weapons to get into the wrong hands easily. The article claims the division between the supporters of gun control and critics have political undertones. Statistically, the source indicates a correlation between the increase in gun ownership and rising homicides.
The article is trustworthy since it is relevant to the topic, recent, scholarly, and peer-reviewed. The ideas discussed are supported with in-text citations from reputable sources listed at the end of the article in the references section. It explains in detail the various aspects of gun violence, from politics and social exclusion to constitutional provisions. The report is also recent, indicating that the information is up to date. From the language used, the target audience is both the general public and policymakers. The authors explain the ideas in the simplest way possible while still maintaining the scholarly quality of the arguments. Densely and Peterson also allude to the contribution of various policies, government agencies, politics, and social issues to the escalation of the problem, to which the audience can relate. In addition, the involved authors are reputable with experience and knowledge in criminal justice as both are Ph.D. holders. The authors presented numerous convincing ideas and arguments that are well supported by facts. An important quote from the article is, “There is some truth to the adage, “Guns don’t kill people; people kill people” (Densely and Peterson 13). The idea is mind-provoking and leaves one wondering who to blame if the guns do not kill by themselves.
The content of the source provides an interesting perspective on how to view the issue of gun violence. Starting with the historical background of the problem, examining the constitutional contribution, and a simple explanation of the ideas make the article’s argument plausible. Additionally, the connection of the opinions in the source to the larger issue of gun violence in the U.S is excellent. The authors presented clear facts on the causes of firearm crimes, differences among the public, and the violence statistics. One of the questions the authors need to answer is their take on whether guns should be legalized throughout the country. Another concern the writers should address is their understanding of the constitution on bearing guns.
Luca et al. “The Impact of Mass Shootings on Gun Policy.” Journal of Public Economics, vol. 181, 2020, pp. 5-41. Web.
In the article, the authors discuss three crucial findings on the consequences of the mass shooting on gun laws. The first impact is that mass shooting contributes to increasing policy responses. According to the authors, one incident leads to at least 15% of new bills regarding firearms. The second claim is that even though mass shooting contributes a small number of gun-related incidences, it evokes a significant influence compared to other homicides. Lastly, the authors argue that the party in power determines which bills become law.
The source is up to date, scholarly, unbiased, and relevant to the topic, thus, trustworthy. Hence, one can understand some of the effective approaches for reducing homicides. The article aims to address the scholars and policymakers concerning the importance of examining the impacts of specific gun-related crimes on laws. However, one can still question the significance of the existing rules if every incident contributes to proposals for new policies. What is more interesting in the article is how politics affect gun laws. The authors argue that the enactment of new policies depends on the ruling party. Specifically, when the Democrats control Congress, the source claims that the enacted mass shooting acts do not have much significance. The article suggests, “States decide a variety of gun policies ranging from who can purchase and possess a gun to what types of firearms are allowed in different situations to how guns should be stored and what types of training should be undertaken by gun owners.” The claims indicate that many challenges for gun control laws most probably arise from state policies.
Luca et al.’s article present compelling content regarding gun violence and policies. The source approaches the issue from different angles but focuses more on the implications of the laws. Luca et al. connect gun violence to failed or improper government regulations. The connection between the article’s contents and the issue at hand is superb. The authors explain how politics influence mass shootings. However, one would want to understand what the writers think about the connection between hate groups and gun violence.
Granse, Alicia L. “Gun Control and the Color of the Law.” Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality. Vol. 37, no. 2, 2019, pp. 387-419. Web.
The article discusses the growing debate on gun control laws for the past three decades. The author writes that gun violence has been a persistent problem in the U.S. to such an extent that Americans are ten times likely to be killed by gun-related incidences than people in other industrialized countries. However, the article explains that the existing laws do not function as expected since they propagate inequality between white and black people. According to the author, the minority groups, especially African Americans, are overpoliced due to a lack of political will to enact laws that ensure equality. The article maintains that black people are treated differently from their white counterparts, leading to dissatisfaction and more violence.
The source is scholarly and meets all the criteria to be used for college-level research. It is recent, relevant, and credible. The information in it expounds further the research topic, contributing extensive knowledge. While the author focuses on the selectivity of the law, the concern is how the policies torment the minority groups, yet the constitution does not discriminate. Nonetheless, the most interesting assertion of the article concerns the quote, “statutes criminalizing firearm possession help reinforce the social concept that White gun owners are heroes protecting their homes and their families, whereas Black gun owners are thugs, gangbangers, and super predators” (Granse 388). The claim indicates how the impartial application of laws contributes to anger and consequent violence.
Notably, the content of the source explains some of the reasons gun violence is increasing in American society. The authors provide the background information regarding the issue, which forms a crucial basis for research. Additionally, the writers connect gun violence to the dysfunctional laws that intensify the racial gaps. The explanation that over-policing of the minority groups is a significant contributor to gun violence makes sense. However, an individual would ask the authors their opinion on the most effective way of addressing the issue.
Overall, the research depicts pertinent issues of concern in the criminal justice system. The problem of gun control violence has persisted in American society for a long even when laws are already in place. However, the information acquired from the literature review shows that lack of political will is one of the factors contributing to the rise in mass shooting crimes. Another predisposing factor is the impartial application of the laws where the minority groups, mainly black people, are perceived as aggressive and dangerous. Thus, stereotypes appear to be a significant issue escalating hate among the diverse population. The criminal justice system needs to adopt new ways of enhancing and implementing laws by not showing any favoritism or impartiality in the application.