Every Voice Should be Heard

In the article “The benefits and flaws of policy disputes get sidelined when activist movements adopt kids as human shields.” (2018), J.D Tuccille claims that kids opinions are by now means trump cards that should constitute the final word in any debate. Tuccille supports his claim by saying “teens might lie on the outer limits of that protective instinct,” and that “kids are pulled into political discussions by adults who want to trump debate and shame their opponents into acquiescence.” (paragraph 12) The author’s purpose is to show that kids are not prepared for the real world and are just being used and that the grown ups should handle these type of problems, the problem is that they are the ones that don’t have to worry about these type of school shootings as we do since nowadays it can happen anywhere at any time.

That’s why for them they wouldn’t mind if nothing happens to our second amendment.

Tuccille points of how people and the media appeal to our emotions to argue the points. Children have been featured prominently in the gun debate, both by news networks advocating gun control and the president himself. “Kids are pulled into political discussions by adults who want to trump debate and shame their opponents into acquiescence.” (paragraph 12) This is just one example of how people and media appeal to our emotions to argue their points. This is the general category of many fallacies that use emotion in place of reason in order to attempt to win the argument.

Get quality help now

Prof. Finch

Verified

Proficient in: Gun Control

4.7 (346)

“ This writer never make an mistake for me always deliver long before due date. Am telling you man this writer is absolutely the best. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

It is a type of manipulation used in place of valid logic. “There is something about infants which prompts adults to respond to and care for them.” (paragraph 12)

The author is making it seem like if these kids don’t know what they are arguing for, they are arguing for a safer future not just for students but just for everyone out there. Of course they are going to get sponsored to be able to spread this message but it is not so that they can earn money doing this. Tuccille, the author needs to realize that the guns available to the people are the problem. Of course people are part of it too but these mass murders wouldn’t be as big if certain guns were not available. According to Thomas Sowell in his article “The Great Gun Control Fallacy,” “Gun control laws are ineffective. In fact, they are considered to be counter productive to their purpose. The socioeconomic variables have more of an impact on gun related deaths than do gun control laws. Guns are not the root of crime; the problems of society are the root cause of crime. When there are family problems, no opportunities for jobs, and inadequate education, society will experience a rise in crime levels.

Guns are not the problem. People are the problem. People will find a way to commit their crimes even if guns did not exist at all. Gun control laws will not benefit the law-abiding citizen and they will not deter the criminal.” Overall on this article Tuccille needs to understand that everyone’s voice matters on this issue especially the ones that have witnessed mass shootings. Kids are not being used for money or to create more emotional moments to grab more people’s attention; it’s for a better future.

Thomas Sowell’s article, “The Great Gun Control Fallacy” (2012), argues that there just is no correlation between gun ownership and murder rates and that if such law were to change gun control wouldn’t change. Sowell doesn’t really do a good job in backing his argument throughout the essay but he does bring up a solution to what he should do besides banning guns that can contain more ammunition. The fallacy found is Ad populum in the article is one of the few counter-examples offered by gun control zealots, their strongest talking point is that Britain has stronger gun control laws than the United States and lower murder rates. Again to rephrase it’s the Bandwagon fallacy where we would follow what someone else is doing. In this case the U.S would be following the same strict rules over guns as many European countries do so that these events won’t happen as much anymore.

Can we feel safe anywhere in the world anymore? Certainly not. Even in most places that we believe are the safest to be at are not. People can go to church and when they least expect it, someone is about to commit a hate crime. A parent can be dropping their child off at school, expecting them to get back home safe, next thing you know there is a school shooting. In America this has been a problem that we should be expecting on the news at least every other two months with mass shootings piling up one after another. These shootings are becoming far too common and happening way too often, it’s getting to the point where it isn’t a question of IF it’ll happen to you, it’s a question of when. It’s just sad how public shootings are starting to become a common fear to have. After all of these incidents the most common thing to do would be to ban assault rifles since that is the most used weapon to commit these crimes with. But no, we just raise the minimum age. Now a days this generation is more likely to care about gun violence. Teens are beginning to speak out, the voices need to be heard and a change needs to happen.

Many people think that if banning more guns it’s like changing the whole second amendment which is, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Which has almost nothing to do with the problem going on. Like yes, it protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that gun for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. When it comes to protecting freedom, Americans, including those on the Supreme Court, recognize that personal liberties must often be modified for the safety and protection of others. Yet today’s gun rights advocates constantly cite the Second Amendment of the Constitution, the right to bear arms, when threatened by attempts to limit, but not eliminate, modern-day weapons.

We all want a place where we can be and feel safe, especially if it’s for our kids which are the future. Everyone should listen to the kids around the country fighting for Gun Control. They have experienced stuff which many of us would wish to always avoid. Of course this should all be emotional but no one should tell them to never speak out, every voice must be heard for a change. Even if it means that we have to copy another countries law, I just don’t get how some people can keep protecting the gun rights we have. Funding on guns should be eliminated. No amendment will be changed only stricter rules should be applied. Ban assault rifles to the public and leave them for war purposes only. No one should fear anything on a normal day.