With gun control comes a lot of tragic stories, and with tragic stories comes a lot of extreme emotions. Such emotions can cause a drive for change because of the pathos that the story presents. In my research I will be focusing on how the emotional reactions from a shooting fuels the public to demand stricter gun control laws and how to prevent these laws from becoming too severe. This research question is so fascinating to me because of the environment I was exposed to in my adolescent years. Growing up in the south, guns were very prevalent in the society and atmosphere I was raised in. Having a dad and brother who participated in a number of different hunting activities, I've always been exposed to firearms in a way that can be used for safe, recreational activities. Because I've had a first hand experience of firearms not causing harm to people, the topic of gun control is of great interest to me as it would personally affect my family's life. My belief that law-abiding citizens should be able to possess guns for recreational usage is affected by the research exigence of emotional reactions. It is affected in a way that could possibly have guns taken away from people who do not deserve to have this right taken from them because the emotions a citizen has after a shooting could have too great of an impact on these laws. I feel that I'm qualified enough to write about this because of my personal connection with guns and because of the in-depth research I have been doing pertaining to this topic.

In Jill Lepore's article, "Battleground America: One Nation, Under the Gun," she opens her article with an extensive description of a school shooting in Chardon High School. By opening her article with a dramatic shooting, she was able to reel in her audience's attention and automatically get people thinking about the destruction guns can have when placed in the wrong hands. Her central claim in this article is largely researched and focuses mainly on how the difference between when the Second Amendment was written to present time makes any reference to the Second Amendment archaic. The author's major values are placed on the belief that guns are too accessible causing too much temptation to use guns for negative purposes. By researching and analyzing the Second Amendment and gun control laws, Jill Lepore is a credible author; however, she has used her knowledge to create an article biased towards stricter gun control laws that should have no connection to the Second Amendment.

In the article, "Gun Control Isn't the Answer," James Wilson uses statistics comparing gun homicide rates in the United States to other countries to prove his claim that if by some miracle guns were removed from every citizen it still wouldn't decrease the murder rates. The author uses evidence from mass shootings all over the world to discuss some of the worst violence has occurred in countries overseas with firearms proving that the issue is not centered in the Untied States, but rather a worldwide issue. James Wilson places value on guns and believes that a law-abiding citizen having access to a gun to stop the shooter has stopped mass shootings. The author currently teaches at Pepperdine University and previously taught at UCLA and Harvard University establishes credibility because Ivy League schools have documented that he understands topics well enough to teach them to others. Although he is credible, the author establishes bias towards fewer gun control laws stating that stricter gun control laws will not only not affect the current gun-homicide rate, but also make it worse.

James Hamblin, author of the article, "Why We Can't Talk About Gun Control," claims that any regulation of firearms is impossible to pass because gun advocates can't get a word in to the people who oppose any sort of gun law. Because they believe any sort of gun law would be an infringement to their rights, Hamblin uses many examples of things in our every day life, like the regulated speed limit, to persuade readers to believe that regulation does not mean infringement. By using the Second Amendment, the author proves that even this amendment states a well-regulated militia. The gun control debate is a highly publicized public safety issue with numerous extreme opinions making it nearly impossible to create a dialogue over challenging point of views. The author places value on guns and even owns guns himself; however, he doesn't find it irrational to believe that there should be more gun control laws along with the current gun control laws actually being enforced. James Hamblin, M.D. is a gun owner and senior editor of the Atlantic making his opinion a credible point of view for this topic. The bias of the author affects the source as a whole as the source believes in harsher gun control laws.

My research exigence is why emotional reactions fuel stricter gun control laws and how to prevent emotional reactions from causing too strict of gun control laws. This research exigence is arguable because gun control advocates are going to argue that emotions have nothing to do with the desire for the stricter gun control laws, while anti gun control supporters are going to argue that the desire for stricter fun control laws has everything to do with emotional reactions to a mass shooting. By using the Second Amendment, Jill Lepore and James Hamblin both focus on the wording and how it applies to the 21st century to support their claim to stricter gun control laws. However, James Wilson disagrees with gun control laws and claims stricter gun control laws will only cause higher murder rates across not only the United States, but across the world. The different perspectives of all of the authors have educated me in both sides of the argument influencing me to delve deeper into the pro gun control side of the debate. In order to express my research exigence in 2,500 words I might focus on how to prevent emotional reactions from creating stricter gun control laws.

