Academic Master


Rhetorical Analysis of the Issue of Gun Control


The paper aims to provide an analysis essay on the subject of gun control. For the purpose of studying it, the references will be taken from Gun Control written by James Wilson. James Wilson is a reputable, and well-known Collins Professor of Management and Public Policy at the University of California at Los Angeles. As recently extracted from the Florida shooting incident, as well as the president’s viewpoint on gun control legislation there is quite a chaos surrounding the issue of gun control laws. This essay aims to analyze that issue.

The public supports gun control laws, and they firmly believe that people of any unsound mind must not be given licensed guns at any cost. Recently, Emma Gonzalez made an urge that people of unsound minds, psychopaths, and other drunkard individuals must not be allowed to have a licensed gun; however, the identifications state that the shooter who led this incident owned a licensed gun and killed 17 people. (Wilson, 46)

According to James Wilson, legal restraints have been placed on the lawful purchase of guns; thus, it will have zero effect on illegal gun ownership. Furthermore, the statistics evidently say that there are 200 million guns that have gun ownership and about one-third of them own handguns. Also, the 2 percent of the population, including the ones who commit crimes, is one of the people who lie under this one-third of the population. It would be politically impossible for these individuals, which would lead to confiscations related to legally purchased guns. The issue is that the gun control laws lie around both the use of illegal purchase, as well as legal purchase. There is a one-sixth population that uses legally purchased handguns and these are legally owned guns. (Wilcox, 24)

This will further lead to the stock of legally purchased guns, as well as ammunition that may reduce the capacity of law-abiding people in order to defend themselves. A case like a Florida school shooting can be a case based on this statement. In this case, the shooter owned a legally owned purchase of ammunition, thus, he has the entire right to defend his case. Eventually, this also leads to a deep-rooted problem that overall gun control laws must be more effective, and stricter in that sense. According to James Wilson, gun control advocates revolve around the importance of self-defense and the legal purchase of guns related to that, according to Gary Kleck, the criminologist from Florida State University who conducted a household survey approximately every year guns are used for displaying, or firing purposes. Eventually, these were further defended by the police, and the law allowed the ammunition purchase.

My personal viewpoint lies around the facts stated by Emma Gonzalez that any person with an unsound mind, a minor or a drunkard person, or even a person with a mental health issue must not be provided a gun purchase legally. There is no way that a person with a mental health disorder can use, or even understand the importance of gun control. The number of violent crimes, as well as burglaries will be further increased. Therefore, our goal as citizens must not be to disarm law-abiding citizens but rather to understand their psyche. First of all, the number of guns handled unlawfully must be reduced, especially in places like taverns or streets. Second, gun control laws are highly significant as an incident like a Florida school shooting must not happen again. This was simply the lack of gun control law, as earlier stated, the shooter of unsound mind as well as mental health problem owned a gun legally. This is a huge issue if it’s pondered upon.

Criminals themselves understand the fact that gun control advocates are less likely to burgle occupied homes in America, and eventually, the residents rarely have guns. Then, why does a person with mental health issues go to purchase ammunition legally? This is, again, a bitter fact and a deep-rooted problem in American society.

Some gun control advocates will even show agony against the criminals and their use of legal, or illegal purchase of guns. However, they will still defend and rejoin the argument of self-defense, and self-injury. Handgun owners are most likely to shoot themselves or their loved ones as compared to the statistics studied on the issue of criminals. I believe that when a person finds difficulty in their life, it’s easier for them to shoot themselves or their surroundings to retract their frustration of being unable to control themselves. The handgun owners have an added benefit, according to their personal beliefs, that a handgun could be actually used for the purpose of inability to control their environment. Most of the gun accidents also involve the shotguns, as well as the rifles as relative to handguns. The rate of fatal gun accidents is somehow declining, and the rate of handguns is actually increasing. Only 2 percent of gun accidents are done by the victim in the sense of mistake. The people who ignore these facts are also the ones who severely restrict themselves from understanding the sale of guns. They usually state that the adaptation of gun control laws is politically absurd, which I personally agree with, and hence, the criminal assault will keep increasing whether the guns are purchased legally or illegally.

Opponents of gun control, on the other hand, make a different mistake in understanding the problem. Such as, the National Rifle Association believes that guns don’t kill people; thus, people kill people. And, therefore they shifted their responsibility of managing and monitoring the ammunition purchase and eventually blamed it on mental illness. The president himself is putting forward similar kinds of statements. Moreover, the government eventually punishes the people severely for their use of guns and the committing of crimes. But, they forget to understand the reason guns are created, and how the lack of gun control laws is lacking and eventually leading to the purchase of guns legally and illegally. (Wilson, 14)

The government has always been an expert in shifting its responsibilities to abstract concepts like the purchase of ammunition, which has nothing to do with gun control laws but rather mental illnesses. I personally disagree with this stance as depicted by the government.

The attack on the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School is the sixth incident of the year yet there are any serious implementations against the elimination of the issue. Last year, around 58 people died in the Las Vegas concert, which was considered the worst mass shooting in the US. Yet, gun ownership and gun control laws are still not being led to an initiative of tougher control on the matter. According to the evidence, 40% of Americans own a gun or live in a household that has a gun purchase, as said in a 2017 survey. The rate of murder and manslaughter is the highest from the use of firearms, and yet there are no tough gun control initiatives led by the government. From this incident, I put forward a personal urge to study the issue and take an initiative. Moreover, there were 11,000 deaths caused in 2016 due to the involvement of firearms in murder and manslaughter. And the statistics show that it’s high time that the government starts taking this matter seriously. (Wilson, 10)

Work Cited

Wilson, James. Thinking about crime. Basic Books (AZ), 2013.

Wilson, James Q., Joan Petersilia, and James Q. Wilson. Crime: Public policies for crime control. San Francisco, CA: Ics Press, 2002.

Wilcox, Clyde, and John M. Bruce, eds. The changing politics of gun control. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1998.

Wilson, James Q. “Just take away their guns.” (1994): 46-47.



Calculate Your Order

Standard price





Pop-up Message