Literature review

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 1

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 2

Annotated Bibliography

Kevin Boyette

Columbia Southern University

04/06/2016

Essay Topic: The ineffectiveness of increased gun control and why it fails

KATES D.B, MAUSER G. (2007). Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?. a review of international and some domestic evidence. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy

This research paper by Kates first looks into the social factors that lead to violence and later lead to use of guns in committing these violence. She also focusses on the wrong questions being asked concerning gun control leading to less crime. She also looks in detail whether an ordinary person can commit murder and other factors that can lead to them committing such vice. She again gives an insight on presence of many guns and having less crime. She also studies the demographic patterns and in each case looking at the dynamics of gun control and relationship to crime rate. Evidence on macro-historical until the 20th century are also elaborated in details. She further explains more specific and later evidence that banning of firearms does not reduce suicide or murder. She then dissects geographic locations with nations and compares the cases and contrasts even the different countries. This research paper provided an in-depth analysis on my topic of research.

King J. (2015). The Facts That Neither Side Wants To Admit About Gun Control. MintPress News. Retrieved April 6, 2016 from http://www.mintpressnews.com/

In this article by King, first states that people are told that gun control was meant to stop people from killing each other. He goes ahead to dissect the data in the following countries; Ireland, United Kingdom and Australia where according to the data in these countries, their stringent gun control ways did not in any way reduce murders, crime rates and violence among the public. There was even a notable rise in cases of crime with stricter laws. He concludes that murder rates were not impacted by gun control. He however states that the main cause of increase in murder cases was because of increased poverty and that government should focus more of reducing poverty levels rather than introducing gun controls. He gives an example of Russia which initially was strict on gun control but is now allowing the public to have guns. In summary he states that America has a culture problem and not gun problem. The views by the author were important in my work in giving other factors which led to causes which were blamed on gun use.

Kopel D.(2014). The Failure of Canadian Gun Control. Retrieved April 6, 2016 from http://www.davekopel.com/

In this article by Kopel and which is based on his books; the Cowboy, the Samurai and that of the Mountie, he highlights on the most inaccurate and most frequent gun banners which claim that in other countries gun control worked. He suggests that if only they would adopt gun policies which are ‘civilized’ which other nations have the promise by the gun banner was that the crime rates would be low as in other countries. He then explained that a study in other countries showed that crime control was not impacted in any way by gun control. He further gives details of Canada tightening gun laws in the year 1997 and the reaction of American newspapers that there was reduced crime because of the new laws and blamed America for their gun laws which were ‘lax’ urging to follow suit of what Canada had done. He dismisses the claims by the newspapers saying that neither the present or past Canada gun laws had controlled crime. The views of the author were important in understanding more about the topic and ineffectiveness of gun control in Canada.

Malcolm J.L (2012). Two Cautionary Tales of Gun Control. The Wall Street Journal .

This article by Malcom has two stories about stricter rules in control of gun does not ensure safety of the residents as it happened in Australia and Great Britain. In the first tale she explains how one Michael Ryan killed many people in Hungerford, England in 1987. In 1996 also a Thomas Hamilton went into a school in Scotland and killed 16 children their teacher and wounded others. All this happened despite England banning semiautomatic rifles and bringing shotguns. In the case of Hamilton he had a certificate of having a gun but according to rules he was not supposed to have. In the second case an Australian Martin Bryant who had a history of violence killed 35 tourists and it is at this time when Australian rules were tighter than those in United Kingdom. She then concludes that the gun rules in Australia and Britain which were strict did not guarantee their citizens safety and did not prevent massacres. This article was very important to me because of the case studies which clearly explained the situation and the views of the author helped me in my paper.

Masters J. (2016). Gun Control Around the World: A Primer.The Atlantic.Retrieved April 6, 2016 from http://www.theatlantic.com/

In this article by Masters, he looks at gun control among many nations of the world, and even gives data on the number of firearms among 100 people in different years and comparing them with the crime rates in those particular years. It then explains how the modern gun laws in Canada were as a result of increase in cases of violence by guns. It also explains that the less cases of gun related killings in Israel is because of unique ‘gun culture’ in the country. In Britain it looks at still a large number of weapons remaining despite the gun control laws which was supposed to reduce them. In Norway it looks into the critics against gun control that if other Norwegians including the police had arms then Breivik would have been earlier stopped. In the case of Japan which has the lowest cases of gun attacks in the world, analysts link this to the minimal crime rates and people do not have to own guns. This article was important in widening my knowledge about the topic of gun control all over the world.

Moorhouse J.C, Wanner.B (2006). Does Gun Control Reduce Crime or

Does Crime Increase Gun Control? Cato Institute

The author of this research paper first highlights the claims of advocates that laws of gun control reduced violent crime incidences as firearm prevalence was reduced. He explains the two steps in which gun control and criminal cases are related where in the first step where gun control impact on accessibility and availability of guns especially the hand guns. In step two the commission of crimes and the effect by gun’s prevalence. He also looks at how high crime rates can lead to political support for regulation of guns. He therefore identifies the causal effect that runs from crime rates to stricter gun laws. By use of state-level data, the author provides a twin relationship between crime rates and gun control. The results of this result paper helped me in concluding that stricter gun control does not in any way lead to reduced crime rates as it may be suggested elsewhere.

NRA Institute for Legislative Action (1994). Ten Myths About Gun Control. Retrieved April 6, 2016 from http://people.duke.edu/

This article dismisses ten myths about gun controls and had been mistaken for truth. In the first myth they demystify the claim that many Americans wanted more laws on gun control. They also dismiss the myth that a handgun’s sole purpose was to kill people. It also opposed the claim that by a gun being at home then a family member would be killed with it and that citizens who were armed would not deter crime. It also denies that honest citizens did not fear registering and licensing guns which would control crime by criminals being disarmed. The myth that the firearms which are semi-automatic were not for sports but were preferred by criminals and ought to be banned is greatly opposed. The myth that a person who is in public and has a gun is up to mischief is again dismissed in the article. The claim that crime can be controlled by gun control is also demystified. The explanations on how these myths are misunderstood helped me in justifying ineffectiveness of gun control in my research paper.