Our Blind Spot About Guns, By Nicholas Kristof Analysis

Improved Essays
Makenna Lehr
Mrs. Fridley
Composition 1
23 October 2017
A War Between Guns and Regulations Guns are here, guns are there, guns are everywhere! According to Nicholas Kristof, author of “Our Blind Spot about Guns,” guns should be regulated like cars to make them safer to the general public.. He gives information about the history of automobiles and explains the reasons why cars were regulated. Kristof provides statistical information to confirm that thousands of people have died annually in vehicular related accidents. He proposes that instead of taking them away from people, guns should be regulated just as cars have been. He believes that if the government is logical about gun regulations, then there would be a decrease in gun incidents like there has been with vehicles.
Despite Kristof’s credible argument, his ideas are inaccurate because the regulations that presently exist are sufficient and controlled, while still allowing guns to remain convenient. Additional gun laws are not needed because there are enough regulations to provide adequate protection for the public. The existing gun regulations are reasonable due to the background checks that are required when purchasing a gun. Current gun laws outline the requirements of
…show more content…
“Background checks identify individuals who are ineligible to purchase firearms and prevent those persons from obtaining them, making them a key element in preventing tragic and unnecessary gun deaths in the United States” (“Background Check Procedures”). This justifies that background checks are effective ways to limit high-risk people the access to guns. When a citizen decides to purchase a gun from any federally licensed firearms dealer, they will enter the customer’s name and information into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS. Background checks are an important safety guard between selling a gun to a secure or potentially dangerous

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Orfalea argues that “Making access to guns harder--not easier--has been proven to reduce violence” and that “A 2013 study in Jama Internal Medicine revealed that expanded background checks reduce the number of police officers shot to death in the line of duty by 53 percent, and women shot by intimate partners by 47 percent” (4). Levy, however, doubts the validity of these extensive background checks because “Violence-prone buyers who don't pass a background check will purchase elsewhere or steal a gun. Peaceful buyers who don't pass their background check, however, might be unable to defend themselves with an appropriate firearm” (4). Levy also ponders the efficiency and timeliness of background checks in his…

    • 1252 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    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.…

    • 1375 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Instead of passing more gun control laws, this law should be amended to cover these…

    • 1674 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    According to a study done by Harvard’s Deborah Azrael, “roughly 40 percent” of the share of gun holders did not go through a background check” (Masters). Having a background check is an extremely important factor when buying a gun. “When background checks are required, they are extremely effective at keeping guns out of the hands of prohibited persons” (Universal Background Checks). There are any other factors that keep guns out of the wrong hands. However today, it is possible for almost anybody to get his hand on a gun.…

    • 1317 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In 2013 guns claimed the lives of over 33,000 people, while cars claimed just under 33,000 lives. A lot of people suggest that gun fatalities would be lessened if guns were regulated like cars are, this Is the point that Nicholas Kristof talks about in his New York Times essay “Our Blind Spot about Guns”. Others point out that cars and guns are not the most accurate analogy, like Guns.com writer Greg Camp in his article “Guns are not cars; cars are not guns”. Regulating guns as much as we regulate cars can possibly render guns useless and may even invade our gun rights.…

    • 809 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Annotated Bibliography: Gun Control Everyone has their opinion over Guns, many believe it’s ok to have guns but others disagree. But many have guns for protection, I understand people abuse the power on having guns and commit a crime. Many shootings have occurred this year and last year.…

    • 1103 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Rachel Bortnik Dr. Ted Vaggalis PHIL 316: Ethics 8 December 2017 Society’s Rights and Happiness Concerning Guns In Jeff McMahan’s essay, Why Gun ‘Control’ Is Not Enough, he argues for a ban on societies gun ownership—except for police and military services are still allowed to handle a gun. The purpose of McMahan’s argument is to resolve the danger guns cause in societies environment and the issue of guns being in the wrong hands. McMahan focuses on both the anti-gun advocates and the gun advocates disagreement of why or why not guns needs to be banned. Many scenarios are presented from both points of views.…

    • 1631 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Gun Control DBQ Essay

    • 1051 Words
    • 5 Pages

    A logical assertion can, and is, made that certain background checks are desirable in order to decrease the amount of deaths caused by guns. However, we need to understand the effectiveness of these checks, that many who want a gun will go to any means to acquire one. In a study conducted by Daniel W. Webster and Jon S. Vernick of John Hopkins University, over 80 percent of criminals evaluated were not lawful retail purchasers of firearms – as most acquired their weapons from sources such as family members and street sources (Source 1). Additionally, we need to understand that certain firearms illegal in certain states are brought in from other states in which they are legal. Both observations show that while increased background checks and illegalizing specific weapons do have an effect, they may only slow those who will do anything to have powerful armaments.…

    • 1051 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Russ Shafer-Landau provides us with an article by Jeff McMahan in order to give us an analytical argument on gun control. Jeff McMahan, in his article Why Gun Control Isn’t Enough, discusses why he believes guns should not simply be controlled in the United States, rather they should be banned. McMahan makes the case that gun ownership, in its entirety, is dangerous and illogical. Through several examples and through his own reasoning, McMahan hopes to convince the reader that the only way forward on the topic of ‘guns’ in the United States is to completely ban civilians from owning traditional firearms, from the ground up. Through my counter-argument, I intend to show that while McMahan’s argument is versed well on intent, it is mostly normative,…

    • 1297 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In this paper, I will be analyzing and criticizing the argument given by Jeff McMahan in his paper “Why Gun ‘Control’ Is Not Enough”. This essay goes against my personal bias and strives to support an argument in favor of private gun ownership to a certain extent. McMahan is hasty in deciding that a complete ban is necessary to restore order and peace; I refute his conclusion by showing that a gun ban would not be able to stop the ongoing need for safety and because of this an increase in gun control policy would be the best solution to the gun problem in the United States. One portion of the paper provides a summary of the argument given by McMahan in his paper in depth, evaluating his premises and conclusion to establish the position the…

    • 1185 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Americans tend to believe that guns are easily obtained, when in reality current federals laws make it nearly impossible for criminals to legally obtain a weapon. Because of this misconception, Americans are still supporting stricter regulations believing many gun-control campaigns about loopholes. Firstly, when surveying state prison inmates, only 2 % admitted to having got their weapon at a flea market or gun show, 12 % from a store, and the 80% had been obtained illegally or through friends (Hardy). Secondly, NICS instant background checks automatically scans the potential buyer’s criminal and mental health history (if available) and denies them from purchasing the weapon if any red flags come up. However, it could be possible for the criminal to go into the store with a friend whom has a clean background and legally purchase the weapon or make a legal private purchase from an individual without having to go through the background check process.…

    • 1267 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote an article titled “Our Blind Spot about Guns,” which was published in The New York Times in 2014. In the article’s context, he “argues that if guns and their owners were regulated in the same way that cars and their drivers are, thousands of lives could be saved each year” (Kristof 161). He incorporates multiple statistics in his essay, provides us with insights from the opposing side, and compares the issue of gun control to one that occurred a century ago: vehicle control. Just in the first two paragraphs, Kristof does not cease to use startling statistics that he is sure will grab our attention. He brings to light the issue of 1921 when vehicle regulations were non-existent which, therefore, contributed to the issue of high fatality rates.…

    • 710 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Gun Control is Not the Solution Increased Gun Control in the United States is absurd, useless, and unnecessary. In order to increase safety all throughout the United States time and effort must not be spent towards limiting gun owners of their rights. The tragic rash of school, religious, and workplace shootings has turned up the heat on the public conversation about guns. In nearly all of these cases gun laws would not have stopped the shooters from obtaining a firearm.…

    • 1304 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Argumentative “You can have all the gun control laws in the country, but if you don’t enforce them, people are gonna find a way to protect themselves. We need to recognize that bad people are doing bad things with these weapons. It’s not the law-abiding citizens, it’s not the person who uses it as a hobby” (Steele). There are around 100,000 victims of gun violence each year (“Brady Campaign...”). Action needs to be taken so Americans don’t feel unprotected going into a public environment.…

    • 1362 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In recent years, a lot of debate had been going on about the laws pertaining to firearms. Unfortunately, with all of the mass shootings and killings being reported by the media, guns are given a bad reputation. Sadly, many people believe that they should be illegal because they are dangerous and can kill people, but what these people don’t realize is making them illegal will do a lot more harm than good. Guns have created a balance in society and if we were to take them away it could cause a lot of chaos which would result in more crime and more casualties. People deserve the right to bear arms because with proper training one could possibly save his/her life and also protect others.…

    • 918 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays