The article “Guns a Loaded Argument” by Paul Rosenzweig argues his interpretation of the popular controversy over gun laws in the United States. The author Paul Rosenzweig is an adjunct professor of law at George Mason University. He is also the senior legal research colleague in the Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation, the website in which the article is available. The Heritage Foundation is a research and informative institution that publicizes conservative policy topics that support the principle ideas that the foundation stands for. The author has written this article for a mainly conservative audience of readers to allow people more insight into the intricate issues of gun control. Rosenzweig examines the seemingly
…show more content…
He claims that hardly anyone even supporters of the view that it is the individual’s right to own and bear arms is opposed to the necessity of regulating firearms in some effective way. Accordingly, the author makes it clear that the issue is not reasonable regulation, and claims that the government, in his opinion, be capable of and should decide what weapons are okay for certain individuals to have possession of. He also states that it is generally agreed on, at least in his opinion, that nowhere in the Second Amendment does anything prohibit the government’s right to some restriction. He also states that it is also typically granted that individuals should not be in possession of largely destructive weapons like a grenade launcher. The author writes, “Everyone agrees that within some reasonable bounds, the government can and should regulate who owns which types of weapons.” Stating this as not being the source of disagreement creates an effect of there being no question actually existing whereas the author introduces a much greater one. Therefore, in the course of no issue as to whether or not guns should be regulated, it seems clear that the controversy should be easily solved, but the author describes the true discrepancy of the issue. Further using the title “Guns a Loaded Argument,” to introduce the reader to the idea of gun control being a seemingly simple discussion when in fact it is a subject that is tough to reach any agreement
He claims that hardly anyone even supporters of the view that it is the individual’s right to own and bear arms is opposed to the necessity of regulating firearms in some effective way. Accordingly, the author makes it clear that the issue is not reasonable regulation, and claims that the government, in his opinion, be capable of and should decide what weapons are okay for certain individuals to have possession of. He also states that it is generally agreed on, at least in his opinion, that nowhere in the Second Amendment does anything prohibit the government’s right to some restriction. He also states that it is also typically granted that individuals should not be in possession of largely destructive weapons like a grenade launcher. The author writes, “Everyone agrees that within some reasonable bounds, the government can and should regulate who owns which types of weapons.” Stating this as not being the source of disagreement creates an effect of there being no question actually existing whereas the author introduces a much greater one. Therefore, in the course of no issue as to whether or not guns should be regulated, it seems clear that the controversy should be easily solved, but the author describes the true discrepancy of the issue. Further using the title “Guns a Loaded Argument,” to introduce the reader to the idea of gun control being a seemingly simple discussion when in fact it is a subject that is tough to reach any agreement