PLEASE MAKE SURE TO READ THE ATTACHMENT BECAUSE THOSE SOURCES NEED LISTED…
Use the information on the Annotated Bibliography Instruction page to format an annotated bibliography for your Qualitative Research paper. Since the essay requires 5-7 references, you need to have at least 5 sources included in the bibliography. These will be sources you add to your own field research (the interview). As long as the sources you submitted in Annotated Bibliography #1 are still relevant and will be used in the Qualitative paper, you may keep them as two of the sources for this expanded Annotated Bibliography.
Remember, this is a class that focuses on research, so the evidence you include should be from trustworthy, scholarly sources (i.e. no Wikipedia, clickbait, etc.). Your source list and your understanding of source credibility should grow and expand as you become more comfortable and competent with research. Your Annotated Bibliography 2 should show this and represent mostly academic, scholarly sources.
Be sure to consult the APA Resources – 7th Edition for assistance with APA formatting.
4
Gun Control
Lisa M Shaw
South College
ENG1211_ONL10C_ONL10_20
December 22, 2020
Gun Control
Introduction
Gun control measures is a debate that covers a wide area of beliefs to amend changes in criminal activities. Despite the current gun laws being enforced, there are still massive shootings and an increase in dissatisfaction on gun laws. Most individuals do not support the gun laws idea with the belief that it is the determinant of criminal activities; thus, the focus of this paper determines whether gun laws save lives or cost lives.
Discussion
Generally, the existence of the gun laws has no significant impact on the crime rates as Murray (1975) describes that crime rates increase due to social conditions that implore the crime victims to engage in crime. According to the author, acquiring a gun is not evident that the owner will commit violent crime. The author suggests that there is a relationship between the guns, gun laws and violent acts. Most individuals are not familiar with the use of firearms, and even if they are knowledgeable, they will not use the guns on peculiar reasons. Guns have protective measures, and not every individual would act freely and confident to use a weapon. The author argues that laws limit individuals to exercise their rights freely and therefore, most places with strict conservative gun laws have high crime rates since individuals have been restricted from exploring the sufficient opportunity given.
Lott (2013) argues that the existence of many guns results to fewer crimes since the gun owners take many precautions to affect the use of firearms on a crime committed and can only use the guns when the situation calls for gun action. Additionally, the author relates homicide with firearms in that the gun owners who end up killing themselves engage in homicides because they are victims of the activities, causing them to kill themselves. Lott (2013) further argues that crimes are isolated into different categories, those that are committed with handguns which are affected by handgun laws and other crimes like pickpockets, shoplifters, crimes from buildings which cannot be concealed with handgun laws, that is further concluded that have a low effect in discouraging criminals.
Murray (1975), describes the category of people who own guns to be high paid individuals, independent or divorced women, political groups, and highly influential individuals who the gun laws might not affect them in case of criminal activities committed by them. The author explains that higher offence rates result to lower arrest rates due to the gun laws that have been put in place and that most individuals who commit high offences have firearm licenses and they find themselves on the safer side of the law when a crime has been committed.
Jacobs (2002), argues that homeowners use firearms as a self-defensive mechanism to provide a social benefit which acts as a security to them, according to the author, homeowners use guns as a threat to intruders, but they do not fire the arms indicating the lesser chances of committing crimes with guns at hand. The homeowners according to Jacobs (2002), find security by having their guns available with a reason that life insurance is paid not with the belief that the individual will die but act as a security measure to the protection it offers to the policyholder which is the same as the gun-holder, they do not own guns to use them to kill, but the gun’s act as security to protect their lives in case of a threat.
Cook et al. (2011), describes America to contain gun culture due to the development of many homeownership and many crimes related activities taking place, the author indicates that gun ownership benefits citizens if it is used to deter crimes and further describes that it is the happiness of citizen when potential criminals are ganged down using guns for it increases their fears to commit crimes since they believe that most citizens own guns. Cook et al. (2011) additionally indicate that regular and violent crime rates have reduced due to increase in gun ownership and that the US crime rates constitute their history, demographics, culture, and social structure.
Cook et al. (2011) further describe that gun control acts, and amendments have not bored any fruits in gun restrictions since many American citizens have recorded higher deaths using firearms even though the limits are strict on gun manufactures. The author argument is based on the fact that, whether there are strict gun laws or not, American citizens still find loopholes to acquire handguns which they term as a right to them and therefore, questions are raised on the amendments and laws that govern the guns since they are broken in many ways by the same administration personnel who make them.
According to Murray (1975), there has been an increase of handgun ownership which is used for self-defense in the US, and most citizens and homeownership view it to be an essential part in their lives to own a gun. US is regarded to have the highest number of both violent crime rate and common crimes with an argument that the citizens need a handgun to protect themselves, the authors od the gun control as much as they argue that measures have to put in controlling the firearm used in the US, they all support the acquisition of guns to be every citizen right of owning the guns with the belief that, the US is a developed country with many diverse nations migrating annually, and because the laws put in place are not in a way protecting the citizens, then those citizens have a right to defend themselves from threats and violence.
Murray (1975), moreover, argues that the various types of gun laws should have an impact in lowering the violent crime rate caused by firearms but if it does not constitute that, then the law itself is a failure and has no subjection to citizens lives. Additionally, the authors use of different hypotheses to relate access of guns and gun laws indicate that the gun laws do not give a substantial effect on the reduction of crimes and therefore conclude that having gun laws have no superior effect on crimes.
Conclusion
The rate at which violent crimes are committed in the US according to recent studies indicate that there is no relation between gun laws and acquisition of guns, and therefore, conclude that the gun laws cannot change the crime rates in the US, thus the need for firearm acquisition to be publicly endorsed as a right to every citizen.
References
Cook, P. J., Braga, A. A., & Moore, M. H. (2011). Gun control. Crime and public policy, 257-292.
Murray, D. R. (1975). Handguns, gun control laws and firearm violence. Social Problems, 23(1), 81-93.
Lott, J. R. (2013). More guns, less crime: Understanding crime and gun control laws. University of Chicago Press.
Jacobs, J. B. (2002). Can gun control work?. Oxford University Press.
1
Gun Control
Lisa M Shaw
South College
ENG1211_ONL10C_ONL10_20
December 22, 2020
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
Running head
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
My name
2
Gun Control
Introduction
Gun control measures is a debate that covers a wide area of beliefs to amend changes in
criminal activities. Despite the current gun laws being enforced, there are still massive shootings
and an increase in dissatisfaction on gun laws. Most individuals do not support the gun laws idea
with the belief that it is the determinant of criminal activities; thus, the focus of this paper
determines whether gun laws save lives or cost lives.
Discussion
Generally, the existence of the gun laws has no significant impact on the crime rates as
Murray (1975) describes that crime rates increase due to social conditions that implore the crime
victims to engage in crime. According to the author, acquiring a gun is not evident that the owner
will commit violent crime. The author suggests that there is a relationship between the guns, gun
laws and violent acts. Most individuals are not familiar with the use of firearms, and even if they
are knowledgeable, they will not use the guns on peculiar reasons. Guns have protective
measures, and not every individual would act freely and confident to use a weapon. The author
argues that laws limit individuals to exercise their rights freely and therefore, most places with
strict conservative gun laws have high crime rates since individuals have been restricted from
exploring the sufficient opportunity given.
Lott (2013) argues that the existence of many guns results to fewer crimes since the gun
owners take many precautions to affect the use of firearms on a crime committed and can only
use the guns when the situation calls for gun action. Additionally, the author relates homicide
with firearms in that the gun owners who end up killing themselves engage in homicides because
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
How so? Providing direct quotes help show the reader what you’re talking about. You want to show, not tell.
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
You do not need this. The subheaders and organization like this come into play in the next paper.
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
This is an OLD source, and the credibility in it is weak because of this. So much has changed since then that the more recent the study the more accurate it is.
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
Who? Remain as specific as possible. Always. Introduce your source, and then refer to them by their last name for identification.
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
You should have an answer here. The thesis describes direction for what you’ll be discussing and therefore should indicate your stance. You can state that “thus, the focus of this paper determines that ____ because _____ ” <-- supporting points
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
You do not need these subheaders. Your first paragraph is always your introduction paragraph.
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
3
they are victims of the activities, causing them to kill themselves. Lott (2013) further argues that
crimes are isolated into different categories, those that are committed with handguns which are
affected by handgun laws and other crimes like pickpockets, shoplifters, crimes from buildings
which cannot be concealed with handgun laws, that is further concluded that have a low effect in
discouraging criminals.
Murray (1975), describes the category of people who own guns to be high paid
individuals, independent or divorced women, political groups, and highly influential individuals
who the gun laws might not affect them in case of criminal activities committed by them. The
author explains that higher offence rates result to lower arrest rates due to the gun laws that have
been put in place and that most individuals who commit high offences have firearm licenses and
they find themselves on the safer side of the law when a crime has been committed.
Jacobs (2002), argues that homeowners use firearms as a self-defensive mechanism to
provide a social benefit which acts as a security to them, according to the author, homeowners
use guns as a threat to intruders, but they do not fire the arms indicating the lesser chances of
committing crimes with guns at hand. The homeowners according to Jacobs (2002), find security
by having their guns available with a reason that life insurance is paid not with the belief that the
individual will die but act as a security measure to the protection it offers to the policyholder
which is the same as the gun-holder, they do not own guns to use them to kill, but the gun’s act
as security to protect their lives in case of a threat.
Cook et al. (2011), describes America to contain gun culture due to the development of
many homeownership and many crimes related activities taking place, the author indicates that
gun ownership benefits citizens if it is used to deter crimes and further describes that it is the
happiness of citizen when potential criminals are ganged down using guns for it increases their
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
good transitional phrase to keep your writing moving!
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
So it doesn't deter crimes?
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
no need for the apostrophe, it's not the guns possesive act.
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
and
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
So despite a higher offense* they are still safer in relation to the law? This is unclear.
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
This is no longer the case.
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
[.] According
4
fears to commit crimes since they believe that most citizens own guns. Cook et al. (2011)
additionally indicate that regular and violent crime rates have reduced due to increase in gun
ownership and that the US crime rates constitute their history, demographics, culture, and social
structure.
Cook et al. (2011) further describe that gun control acts, and amendments have not bored
any fruits in gun restrictions since many American citizens have recorded higher deaths using
firearms even though the limits are strict on gun manufactures. The author argument is based on
the fact that, whether there are strict gun laws or not, American citizens still find loopholes to
acquire handguns which they term as a right to them and therefore, questions are raised on the
amendments and laws that govern the guns since they are broken in many ways by the same
administration personnel who make them.
According to Murray (1975), there has been an increase of handgun ownership which is
used for self-defense in the US, and most citizens and homeownership view it to be an essential
part in their lives to own a gun. US is regarded to have the highest number of both violent crime
rate and common crimes with an argument that the citizens need a handgun to protect
themselves, the authors od the gun control as much as they argue that measures have to put in
controlling the firearm used in the US, they all support the acquisition of guns to be every citizen
right of owning the guns with the belief that, the US is a developed country with many diverse
nations migrating annually, and because the laws put in place are not in a way protecting the
citizens, then those citizens have a right to defend themselves from threats and violence.
Murray (1975), moreover, argues that the various types of gun laws should have an
impact in lowering the violent crime rate caused by firearms but if it does not constitute that,
then the law itself is a failure and has no subjection to citizens lives. Additionally, the authors
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
s
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
What are some numbers for this? Concrete information is important.
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
again, some numbers?
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
born? birthed?
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
s
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
5
use of different hypotheses to relate access of guns and gun laws indicate that the gun laws do
not give a substantial effect on the reduction of crimes and therefore conclude that having gun
laws have no superior effect on crimes.
Conclusion
The rate at which violent crimes are committed in the US according to recent studies
indicate that there is no relation between gun laws and acquisition of guns, and therefore,
conclude that the gun laws cannot change the crime rates in the US, thus the need for firearm
acquisition to be publicly endorsed as a right to every citizen.
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
It doesn't reduce crime?
Chelsie Carter
114610000000012422
So, if it doesn't reduce crime ... it can make sense why people should be allowed to have guns. But, does gun ownership increase crime?
6
References
Cook, P. J., Braga, A. A., & Moore, M. H. (2011). Gun control. Crime and public policy, 257-
292.
Murray, D. R. (1975). Handguns, gun control laws and firearm violence. Social Problems, 23(1),
81-93.
Lott, J. R. (2013). More guns, less crime: Understanding crime and gun control laws. University
of Chicago Press.
Jacobs, J. B. (2002). Can gun control work?. Oxford University Press.
