Phd Isaac newton only

Rough Draft

J L

COM 170

11 Jan 2016

JC

Gun Control takes away the rights given by our forefathers

Your home is invaded and you are unable to protect it due to a law making it illegal to own a firearms. With gun control criminals will continue to get illegal firearms and the law abiding citizens will not. The government is trying to take our given rights given by the United States Constitution.

"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." (US Constitution, 1791)

The citizens of the United States are given the right to bear arms so we should be able to adequately arm ourselves in a fashion that best protects us f rom today's modern day threats. The threat of Militarizing Police or the government turning on its citizens, as with the Japanese Americans during Pearl Harbor. During the "Attacks in France" terrorist killed people throughout Paris, none of which had the ability to protects themselves due to gun control. The shootings in San Bernardino is another example. Had the employees been allowed to arm themselves they might have been able to stop the shooters. The simple thought of the population possibly being armed is alone a deterrent. These examples are why our forefathers wrote the 2nd Amendment into the Constitution of the United States.

Statistics of those countries which have enacted gun laws, prove that it does not work. It is a myth that countries with gun bans or strict gun laws reduce crime. Guns do not kill, those armed with bad intentions do. Australia, Britain, France, Russia, Scotland, Sweden and Switzerland have very strict gun control laws of some kind. Those countries all have higher crime rates and/or crimes using other types of weapons other than guns. I've added quotes from Prof. Don Kates and Prof. Gary Mauser out of a gun study from Harvard Law published in Volume 30, Number 2 of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy (pp. 649-694):

" Nations with stringent anti-gun laws generally have substantially higher murder rates than those that do not. The study found that the nine European nations with the lowest rates of gun ownership (5,000 or fewer guns per 100,000 population) have a combined murder rate three times higher than that of the nine nations with the highest rates of gun ownership (at least 15,000 guns per 100,000 population).

For example, Norway has the highest rate of gun ownership in Western Europe, yet possesses the lowest murder rate. In contrast, Holland’s murder rate is nearly the worst, despite having the lowest gun ownership rate in Western Europe. Sweden and Denmark are two more examples of nations with high murder rates but few guns. " (Kates & Mauser, 2007)

"[P]er capita murder overall is only half as frequent in the United States as in several other nations where gun murder is rarer, but murder by strangling, stabbing, or beating is much more frequent. (p. 663 – emphases in original)" (Kates & Mauser, 2007)

Gun control, simply put, does not reduce crime.

States with conceal and carry laws have reduced crime by allowing citizens to protect themselves. When criminals have committed crimes against individuals or business owners they have been met with resistance or held at gun point until police arrive. When citizens have the right to carry a firearm, criminals have considerably reduced thought to commit crimes against them. " Based on 25 years of correlated statistics from all of the more than 3,000 American counties, Lott and Mustard conclude that adoption of these statutes has deterred criminals from confrontation crime and caused murder and violent crime to fall faster in states that adopted this policy than in states that did not." (Lott & Mustard, 1997) Guns do not kill, those armed with bad intensions do. Conceal and carry should be allowed in every state.

Studies prove gun control is not the answer. Regardless, it is the right of the individual to choose if armed or not. I encourage you to exercise your 2nd Amendment right to bear arms, and join or support organizations like the NRA.

Rough Draft
Content and Development	Points Possible	Comments
All key elements of the assignment are covered. · The rough draft is complete enough for constructive feedback (at least 700 words—I will deduct .5 points for every 100 words missing). · The paper develops a central theme or idea (about the previously approved topic) directed toward the appropriate audience.	1/2	Approximately 200 of your 700 words are not your own, James. This paper should be almost all of your own writing. In fact, I did not see a single quotation that needs to remain in this paper. The evidence presented in the quotes can be included in your own words (still cite the sources) very easily. Please make this a priority as you revise. Both your introduction and conclusion need some development. You jump right in to your topic and you end too abruptly. Add a little summary to keep it from sounding so argumentative.
The introduction includes an attention-getter, provides sufficient background on the topic, previews major points, and includes the most recent version of the previously approved thesis.	2/3
Body paragraphs are arranged logically. Each contains a topic sentence that directly addresses the thesis, effective supporting details, examples, or analysis, and a concluding sentence.	4/4
The conclusion begins with the restated thesis, reviews the major points, and ends with a lasting thought.	2/3
Readability and Style
The tone is appropriate to the audience, content, and assignment. (no first- or second-person, no contractions, or slang)	1/2	You’ve used first- and second-person pronouns throughout the essay.
Appropriate transitions are included within and between paragraphs.	1.5/2	As you smooth out those quotations, be sure to work on tying the ideas in the body paragraphs back to your thesis.
Formatting and Mechanics
The template is used to format the title page, page numbers, margins, and spacing correctly.	1/1
Rules of grammar, usage, and punctuation are followed.	1.5/2	Be sure to take the time to submit to WritePoint and revise accordingly!
Spelling is correct.	1/1
Late Penalty	-2	One day late.
Total Points	13/20

References

Kates and Mauser (2007). Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder Suicide? Volume 30, Number 2 of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy (pp. 649-694) Retrieved from http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

Lott and Mustard (1997). Crime, Deterrence, and Right‐to‐Carry Concealed Handguns. 26 J. Legal Stud Retrieved from http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

Madison, J (1791). United States Bill of Rights. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

�Remember, academic essays must be written in the third person—do not use you or your. These are second-person pronouns and show that you are addressing the reader directly; keep the focus on the content, not the reader.

�Do not use this quote here. Instead, just add a little detail to the previous sentence. You should only use quotations when they add something you cannot say yourself in a better way or because you specifically want to show an expert’s point of view. This does not fit either of those categories. It is also confusing to have a quote at the end of your introduction where your thesis should be.

�so they should be able to adequately arm themselves to protect them from… Do not use first person pronouns either.

�fragment

�No. This is not the way to introduce quotes---and you should not use these quotes, either. No more than 10% of your paper should be quotes. Your quotes amount to more than 35% of your paper—an essay is not a collection of quotes, it is a statement of your opinion. You’ll need to paraphrase or summarize the material in these quotes before submitting the final draft.

According to Don Kates and Gary Mauser, the countries with stricter gun laws actually have higher murder rates than those that do not limit citizens’ rights to arm themselves. For example, Norway has the lowest murder rate….etc. Then, after you’ve summarized their findings, just put the date of the publication in parenthesis. Put the bibliographic info (Harvard Law Review) on a separate page at the end of your paper.

�Nothing here needs to be quoted—you can put this all in your own words. Give Lott and Mustard credit for the study, but don’t copy this info directly and quote it. It’s basically saying everything you’ve already said. You just need this info to show that there is actual proof of your theory. Use it for that purpose only.

�First, you’ve slipped back into first/second person pronouns. Secondly, you’ve brought up something completely new here—nowhere else have you mentioned the NRA. If you want to end with this kind of call to action, you’re going to need to explain why in your conclusion. Restate the main points that you’ve made and then explain that organizations like the National Rifle Association recognize these truths and are fighting to protect….etc… Elaborate! And Summarize!