In the essay entitled “Ban the Things, Ban Them All“ by Molly Ivins, the author writes of her opinion on gun control. She using humor and what comes across as plain common sense explains that although she is not against guns she has her reasons for wanting guns in the hands of average citizens regulated more or banned. Ms. Ivins clarifies that although she is in favor of the second amendment she feels that society misinterprets its meaning and that not everyone should own a firearm.
In her essay, Ms. Ivins begins by stating, “I am not anti-gun. I’m pro-knife. Consider the merits of the knife.”(Cite) With a touch of comedy utilized as a cunning instrument all through her article, she explains that as someone who is open-minded with the principles …show more content…
“Guns don’t kill people” (Cite) was one of her object of ridicule, she brushed it away by reminding us that although the gun itself did not kill people, the lack of one would have stopped it, likewise the reason for the invention of guns was to kill, people included. She promptly rebutted the excuse of the using the car as a weapon to maim and kill with humor and agreeing although we have idiots that fail to understand how a motor vehicle operates yet still attempt to drive, we still allow people to buy them. However, Ms. Ivins did gave her opinion on the fact that we should have the same requirements and restrictions on firearms as we do …show more content…
In our failure to better control firearms we have inadvertently placed them in the hands of drug dealers, psychopaths and worst of all Americas youth, to do with as the please no matter the outcome. In addition, for those who hunt or sport shoot, should have strict regulations when owning or using a gun. She explains the need to learn not to just fire a gun but to have the discipline and training not to fire one. Military members as well as law enforcement train this way in order to save a life instead of taking one. I understand where she references the martial arts expert and his level of knowledge and restraint and how this level of understanding is of the utmost importance to anyone who has access to guns.
In her essay, Ms. Ivins begins by stating, “I am not anti-gun. I’m pro-knife. Consider the merits of the knife.”(Cite) With a touch of comedy utilized as a cunning instrument all through her article, she explains that as someone who is open-minded with the principles …show more content…
“Guns don’t kill people” (Cite) was one of her object of ridicule, she brushed it away by reminding us that although the gun itself did not kill people, the lack of one would have stopped it, likewise the reason for the invention of guns was to kill, people included. She promptly rebutted the excuse of the using the car as a weapon to maim and kill with humor and agreeing although we have idiots that fail to understand how a motor vehicle operates yet still attempt to drive, we still allow people to buy them. However, Ms. Ivins did gave her opinion on the fact that we should have the same requirements and restrictions on firearms as we do …show more content…
In our failure to better control firearms we have inadvertently placed them in the hands of drug dealers, psychopaths and worst of all Americas youth, to do with as the please no matter the outcome. In addition, for those who hunt or sport shoot, should have strict regulations when owning or using a gun. She explains the need to learn not to just fire a gun but to have the discipline and training not to fire one. Military members as well as law enforcement train this way in order to save a life instead of taking one. I understand where she references the martial arts expert and his level of knowledge and restraint and how this level of understanding is of the utmost importance to anyone who has access to guns.