I am very interested in the topic of whether assault rifles should be banned from being purchased or sold. I feel that guns are a vital part of our lives as citizens of the United States of America, and we should have the right guaranteed to us in the second amendment of the United States to bear arms and purchase and sell guns including assault rifles. Personally, I feel that through my research I have learned that guns aren't causing problems in this country. Also, those who are for banning the assault rifles are talking about changing an amendment which would change history, most likely for the worst. This research question affects me personally because I myself and some members of my family own guns for safety, and to have these guns taken away would greatly affect the safety of my family and I. The reason I am qualified to write this argumentative essay is because of the fact that my family personally owns a gun, I have multiple friends who own guns, and my relatives also own guns, so I have personal experience with owning them and can provide an argument to back up my statements. 

My first article is called "A Criminologist's Case Against Gun Control". The summary of this article is that the crime rate and the amount of guns in the country are not correlated. The majority of gun related deaths are actually suicides, not murders. People feel that assault rifles shoot like machine guns and that they should be banned, however they actually fire like pistols so banning them would be pointless. Incorporating gun rights policies used in other countries such as the United Kingdom would not work because they aren't a constitution or a Supreme Court like the United States does. Background checks wouldn't work either because criminals already obtain guns through the black market.  The bottom line is it wouldn't work out in the United States. The author of the article is Jacob Davidson. He is credible because he is a news editor at Time Magazine, and has a Bachelor degree in Political Science. This article is argumentative and therefore does include some biased opinions on the topic. However, the article is still credible and has many points that can refute arguments brought up by the opposing side in multiple situations. My second article is called "An Armed Community: The Origins and Meaning of the Right to Bear Arms".  The summary of this article is that in order to have a well regulated militia, the right to bear arms must be necessary. Throughout history multiple rebellions have occurred, and without the right to bear arms our nation would have been put down. In order to have free people, the people themselves must be armed. The author of the book is Lawrence Delbert Cress. He is credible because he wrote his own book called Citizens in Arms about the Army and Militia during the War of 1812, so he already has background information on guns. This is an informative article, so there is no biased. This book represents both sides of the argument equally taking no sides. My third article is called "Ten Reasons Why States Should Reject 'Assault Weapon' and 'Large' Magazine Bans". The summary of this article is the ban of assault rifles and gun magazine clips with ten bullets or more should not be put into place. Assault rifles are actually semi automatic and military weapons are fully automatic. Also, semi automatic rifles are less powerful than gun control supporters say they are. Violence has been cut in half with the purchase of assault rifles. Overall, if they banned assault rifles then there would be more problems in our country. Assault rifles should not be banned mainly for three reasons. The crime rate will increase if they are banned, the assault rifles are not fully automatic military grade guns, and they are less powerful than most hunting rifles. The crime rates have actually dropped substantially with the purchase and sale of assault rifles. If they were taken away crime rates could rise again endangering the lives of many. Assault rifles actually are semi automatic which is just like a handgun, so how could they be more dangerous than if people were allowed to carry pistols. Lastly, assault rifles aren't more powerful than most guns. In fact it isn't the gun that determines the power but the caliber of bullet, and in assault rifles they have lower calibers than most guns. The NRA-ILA works with the National Rifle Association to present credible articles fighting against banning the second amendment right to bear arms. They are credible because in each article they back up their evidence with sources from other credible people. This source is biased towards the side against banning assault rifles. The wording that the author used was obviously one sided towards the people wanting to ban assault rifles. They use words such as we feel which suggests that their opinion is correct. 

This research question is arguable because both sides have evidence to make an argument either way for or against the purchase and sale of assault rifles. All of my sources agree that banning assault rifles would be a bad idea. They had similar arguments about how crime has lowered and murder rates are also lower with the increased purchase of assault rifles as well as other guns. These perspectives have not changed my views at all on this topic. I do not feel that I need to revise my research question.
