Gun control laws have always mattered to me personally, because it's a growing issue and Americans have seemed to let it become socially acceptable. It has been proven statistically that more people die, when people are allowed to carry firearms in public facilities. I don't think it's necessary to carry around weapons, especially if you aren't trained to use it. Im not against owning a gun or any other weapon. I just think for the safety and protection of civilians in our country it's not in the best interest to allow citizens to carry their own weapon. Law enforcement should be able to carry a weapon as protection for the citizens. Allowing gun carry shows how people may not always rely on police officers to take care of issues at hand. I have seen people carry guns around and it doesn't make me more comfortable to be around them. In fact, I actually feel uncomfortable, because I realize they have a gun and I don't. If I see a police officer with a weapon I don't feel uncomfortable. I know they're here to do good rather than a random stranger with a gun on their hip. Prior to my research I wouldn't have been qualified to discuss this issue. After gathering several reliable sources and reading through professional articles I have learned about numerous important facts and stats that have backed up my opinion.

CNN discussed the issue of major shootings in our country. Jon Donohue says that after major shootings in the country recently President Obama has been questioned about acting on the gun control laws. The United States has the highest homicide rate among industrialized nations. Donohue believes with more control we could possibly have one of the lowest homicide rates. John Donohue seems to truly care about the issue at hand. He stresses how the statistics associated with gun related deaths can be significantly different just by taking an extra step and changing the gun control laws. He also provides facts to support the argument that guns are not often used as defense mechanisms. One of these being the fact that 99.2 percent of victims of a nonfatal, violent crime did not use a gun to defend themselves. Being that the author is a writer for CNN I consider him to be credible. The article obviously contains a general biased opinion that we should change gun control laws and make them more strict. Although the author gives a biased opinion a reader cannot say that the facts he has to support his argument aren't eye-opening. As a writer you should always make your article interesting to readers and John Donohue did an excellent job of that in this article.

The article David Frum wrote is focussing on the dangers a person endures by simply owning a firearm. He also mentions points that most readers aren't aware of until seeing this article. In 2012, a citizen carrying a gun was 4.5 times more likely to be shot at and 4.2 times more likely to be killed. Also Congress has banned the Center for Disease Control to do any studies on gun violence. ). The article cares completely about the dangers of guns and doesn't even mention the possibility of guns having a positive impact being carried by citizens of our country. This is the author's way of persuasion. By avoiding using a counter argument it can make a reader begin to side with the author. David Frum and The Daily Beast seem to have gathered all their information on this topic from the University of Pennsylvania and this makes me feel more comfortable with the credibility of the source. Being that college students like myself contributed to this I believe they gathered a majority of their information from another credible source.

This article is a personal experience from a woman who was pregnant and was faced with the problem of carrying a baby and gun at the same time. The author, Beth Alcazar tells the audience about how many physical and emotional problems a woman endures during the nine month stage of pregnancy. Her main point is that carrying a gun is a responsibility. If you decided to carry it you need to be able to make the right decisions with it and everyone isn't able to make the right choices. The author is stressing the mental stability and responsibility it takes to make the right decisions with a gun. Many people don't realize the click of the trigger is a matter of life or death. The artist speaks of her experience with pregnancy and how it took her through mental, physical, and emotional struggles. The author seems to be credible based on what she is talking about. Any woman who has had a child should be able to relate to her experience. I don't think it's actually a biased opinion because she is giving us greats facts. Even though I can't relate to pregnancy, I can relate to people not being mentally, physically, or emotionally stable.

The research question I created is arguable because some people won't agree with the side im taking pertaining to this issue. The question is, "why should we have more gun control laws?" People will argue if we should even have more laws and people may also argue about the actual reasons why we should have more control in the law. Someone may present a reason why we should have more gun control laws and someone else may disagree with that reason. I agree with the simple reasons why we should change control laws. There's more deaths and more temptation to use a weapon. I disagree with the reasons that don't really have information to back them up. Some of the reasoning seems more like a matter of opinion or maybe something that bothers them personally. Each source gives insight and made me think more on the issue. You never see things at a different perspective until another perspective is presented to you. This is where you decide to change things about your argument. Not any drastic changes just small things that may have strong facts to support them. If I revise the question I might allow people who support open carry laws to have more say. The question I constructed almost eliminates anyone who isn't against open gun carry laws.

