My First Student Info Request ( for the year ! :)

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

WAGCEVP

Member
Joined
May 26, 2003
Messages
864
Subject: information request
Date: Sep 10, 2003 1:29 PM
My name is Melissa and during the week of November 10, 2003 I will
be presenting a persausive speech to my college speech class. My objective is
to persaude the class that any legislation that takes away the right to own or
carry firearms could prove to be fatally wrong. While I feel strongly that
this is true, I need to be able to back my stand with some kind of proof. I
would like to show the class that handguns are used in defensive, not just in
the crimes they read or hear about in the news. I would also like to present
them with alternatives to the gun control legislation such as educating the
public on the handling and consequences of firearms. I feel that if people were
educated in the use of them and understood their potential to not only harm but
to defend they could understand how wrong gun control really is. I myself,
saw a girl shot and killed when I was living in Illinois and was very for gun
control until my best friend's aunt was beaten repeatedly by her ex-husband and
began carrying a firearm with her wherever she goes. Seeing what she and her
family have experienced has caused me to realize the other side of the
arguement and I would like to give my classmates the same opportunity. Any
information you could direct my way would be greatly appreciated. I can be contacted (contact info deleted)


Thank you for any time and effort put into this request, it will be a great
help.

Sincerly,
Melissa


:D :cool: :cool: :cool:
 
Those of criminal persuasion and felonious intent are not stopped by words alone, unless along the line of "Stop. Armed Citizen. Show your hands NOW! ! ! "
 
Melissa

Good luck and best wishes with your project.

Facts are very useful in persuasive argument, but equally so is genuine passion/ conviction. You say you ( paraphrased ) 'strongly believe in the issue'. By all means look up supporting facts, but don't over-look some 'quality time' examining what you feel inside.

Had a fairly long thread on firearms and the rationale of ownership on TFL thread under UK Firearms.

I am in the UK so will not presume to speak for any American. However, strikes me that the USA is rooted in a nation of self reliant individuals. The Constitution appears to be framed in support of the individual. That is arguably dependant upon the individual accepting responsibility for themselves - therein lies the crux of the firearms debate - from my point of view at least.

Hope that helps.

:D
 
Here is a paper I wrote for US Gov. class Feel free to us any of the Ideas for your speech.



Gun Laws, a Good Intention

With the recent occurrences of mass killing in schools, disgruntled workers taking out their frustrations in a most violent of fashion, and most recently sniper attacks in the D.C. area, gun control is back in the news. The question to be asked is; would stricter gun control laws stop these senseless crimes? No, according to statistics less or more lenient gun control laws are the answer.
In Wakefield Massachusetts Michael McDermott walked in to an internet consulting firm in which he worked and methodically started executing his co-workers. Incidentally, Massachusetts has some of the most stringent gun control laws in the country. One of those laws deals with the acquisition of firearms. That gun law requires a permit to purchase a firearm of any type. It does not matter if it is a handgun or long rifle, for personal protection or hunting, a “Firearm Identification Card†must be issued to the owner of the firearm. Upon investigation into the person of Michael McDermott, it was discovered that he was never issued a “Firearm Identification Cardâ€. If Massachusetts would have had tougher gun laws would this incident still have occurred, chances are yes. If the ownership of guns would have been more easily acquired for the average law abiding citizen, there would have been a greater chance that someone could have cut the onslaught short.
Liberal minds like the one of Scott Hashbarger who, in the late nineties, pushed for more stringent gun control laws in Massachusetts, had good intentions, but to no avail. Massachusetts, which has a population of 6,016,425 people only 175,000 people can legally carry a handgun for protection. That is roughly 2 percent of the population legally carry a gun for protection yet the murder rate per 100,000 people is 2.0, the forcible rape rate is 27.4, and the robbery rate per 100,000 people is 96.6. A look at the crime rate of New Jersey, which as a legally carry for protection percentage of 5/100ths of 1 percent (4,300 people out of 7,747,750), has a murder rate of 4.0, a forcible rape rate of 22.5, and a robbery rate of 309 per 100,000 people. In contrast, Vermont which allows anyone, resident or non-resident, to carry firearms concealed or unconcealed without a permit, has a murder rate of 1.5, forcible rape rate of 26.5, and a robbery rate of 13.4 per 100,000 people. Compare Vermont’s statistics to that of New Jersey; the evidence is clear, gun control has an adverse effect on crime.
So why do so many liberals support gun control? Because, liberals find it easier to point at the flashy pictures of murder and mayhem and scream about gun control instead of pulling the boring statistics and see the futility of such laws. Making gun laws with the right intent has not, nor by any evidence ever will, stop gun violence. Adding gun laws, with the right intent, will however continue the assault of our constitutional right granted to us by the second amendment to keep and bear arms. The public must not succumb to the liberal rhetoric of gun control. Instead efforts need to be made to discover new venues to curb the violence that is plaguing our nation, such as stricter penalties for proven offenders.
According to statistics gun control laws have had no effect on stopping gun related violence. Gun control has proven to be a bad answer to a bad problem. An easy way out that has, in essence, trampled the rights of law-abiding citizens, and made defense from those with no consideration for life or law more difficult.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top