Our Right Not His

Our Right Not His

 

Adam Gopnik, a writer for The New Yorker, and author of the article "In The Wake Of The Las Vegas Shooting, There Can Be No Truce With The Second Amendment," writes about the mass shooting in Las Vegas Nevada, where at least fifty concert attendees were killed and several hundred were wounded. Adam Gopnik makes a point on how he believes there are ways to control gun violence and mass shootings. He explains that gun violence can be controlled by having stricter gun laws and that there should be more government control and less citizens baring arms. He also eludes to the point that If there are travel bans that prohibit citizens from going to certain countries, then why can there not be a ban on certain weapons?  Additionally, the article summarizes his belief that there is no reason for the ownership of military-style firearms and that a stance has slipped down the agenda of our government and anti-violence liberals.

 

There is one argument in the article that Adam Gopnik made that I can agree with. He states, “If he was merely a Muslim from a Muslim country, then a massive act of terrorism would have been committed and a militant response, including travel bans and broad suspensions of rights, would be essential”. I do believe that every act of terrorism should project a fierce ban to insure the safety of American citizens. In other ways, we can learn from the “American psycho” by putting a plan into action for such a massive loss of life even if it is at the hands of just one man. Throughout the article there are several pieces of subjective language that stood out.  For example, when Gopnik mentioned “Vice-President Mike Pence, who is not a sociopath, merely a Republican” assuming that a “Republican” could not possibly be someone who could be a sociopath. In addition to “just one more American killer who got his hands on some collection of weapons designed for the sole purpose of killing people” at this point in the investigation, there is a dismay of evidence to back up Adam Gopnik’s’ biased claim that if in fact the start of Stephen Paddock collection of fire arms was only attempt too mainly kill others. I strongly disagree with the article that Adam Gopnik wrote because bans have previously been in place prior to the Las Vegas massacre with no real impact on eliminating gun violence. In conclusion, by removing firearms from law abiding Americans or placing bans on the type of weapon that may be owned, our government would be restricting us from the full use our second amendment right leaving us no real power to protect ourselves from men like Stephen Paddock.