Final Paper, Final Draft

Chris Breuner
Knapp
English 1A
5/26/13

Dear Wayne LaPierre,

     With the topic of gun control and regulation comes countless arguments stemming from all directions for many different interests. Some feel a need to protect the rights of Americans under the second amendment, and others desire to protect their families and live in a less armed country. From the drafting of the constitution, gun control has been a topic for discussion. Many feel that the right to own a firearm of their choice is written in the constitution, while others say it doesn't apply to heavy weaponry. Something that everyone can agree on however, is that gun owners should be educated. Not only on the proper use of weaponry, but proper storage, safety awareness, rules and regulations of gun ranges, as well as the responsibility that comes with gun ownership.

In a country that is split for the regulation of arms, comes debates and speculation about the best course of action. In light of recent tragic events, including Newtown and theater shootings, regulation has become the hype of the news and a call for action that continues to spread over all forms of social media. There seems to only be one detail that both "for gun regulation" and "anti gun regulation" parties have in common, that something needs to change. The purpose of gun regulation is an attempt to create a "safer nation" with less inward violence. This is not done simply with the removal of guns, but takes far more effort.

There are many that believe the freedom to own weapons is an unalienable right. That their right to own and operate weaponry is written in the constitution, and any law that prohibits them from using and carrying their weapons is infringing on the 2nd amendment (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). While this counterargument is valid, it does not take into account that the Bill of Rights, which was written over 300 years ago, has always been subject to interpretation from an ever changing government. For example, the eight amendment clearly states "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." However people are still put to death for crimes. Some people feel this clearly violates the "cruel and unusual punishment" section of the amendment. Laws are always subject to interpretation. If the founding fathers could see what the semi-automatic weapons of today are capable of doing, they may have been more clearer on the second amendment. Or perhaps the amendments were written this way on purpose, to be changed and interpreted differently as the world continues turning.

Another argument against gun regulation, states that taking guns off of the streets will not make them disappear, it will only increase illegal gun smuggling and place more cash and guns in the hands of criminals. While this point is valid, we have to think of the greater good in the end. Lets use methamphetamines for example. If it was legal for meth to be sold in supermarkets. How many new citizens will become meth addicts? How much more meth would be created and sold in our society? A lot like methamphetamines, guns will never fully disappear, no matter how illegal we make them. A lot of gun related accidents happen when kids find guns. According to the John Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research "More than 31,000 people a year in the United States die from gunshot wounds. Because victims are disproportionately young, gun violence is one of the leading causes of premature mortality in the U.S. In addition to these deaths, in 2010, there were an estimated 337,960 nonfatal violent crimes committed with guns, and 73,505 persons treated in hospital emergency departments for non-fatal gunshot wounds." ("The Case for Gun Policy Reforms in America." Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health) More regulation means less guns on the street. These numbers can be drastically reduced.

A prevention of future gun violence lies in education, reform, and regulation. First we need to have all gun owners registered and educated about proper use and storage. This could be done by implementing a gun regulation law, that would require all assault weapons to be banned for citizens who do not possess the required permit (such as retired military personal) Only certain citizens would able to obtain this permit after mandatory instructional classes, and basic psychic exam. Background checks are mandatory for all gun owners. New guns (non assault) may be obtained with a license, after a 14 day waiting period. All guns need to be registered with the ATF. Problems like making assault weapons illegal would also take them out of the hands of well adjusted citizens. And making them illegal would create the daunting task of removing them from the hands of current gun owning citizens. This would prove quite a problem as there are people that would, and are willing to fight rather than give up their guns. So many Americans feel very passionately about gun regulation one way or the other, that it seems only a compromise, or middle ground, would make both sides moderately happy.

Its up to the country to decide how this would play out. Problems will continue to arise, and arguments will continue to be made. However we must bear in mind that safety is the ultimate goal here. How many deaths due to lack of gun control make it worth the luxury of owning guns for comfort and pleasure?

Regards,
Chris Breuner



Whitney, Craig R.  Living with guns : a liberal's case for the Second Amendment. New York : Public Affairs, 2012. Print.

"The Case for Gun Policy Reforms in America." Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 2013. Web. May 2013.
http://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/johns-hopkins-center-for-gun-policy-and-research/publications/WhitePaper102512_CGPR.pdf

Formal Paper Revised Draft

Chris Breuner
Knapp
English 1A
5/26/13


     With the topic of gun control and regulation comes countless arguments stemming from all directions. From some, a need to protect the rights of Americans under the second amendment, and from others, the desire to protect their families and live in a less armed country. From the drafting of the constitution, gun control has been a topic for discussion. Many feel that the right to own a weapon of their choice is written in the constitution, while others say it doesn't apply to heavy weaponry.....

In a country that is split for the regulation of arms, comes debates and speculation about the best course of action. In light of recent events, regulation has become the hype of the news and a call for action that continues to spread over all forms of social media. There seems to only be one detail that both the "for gun regulation" and "anti gun regulation" parties have in common, that something needs to change. The purpose of gun regulation is an attempt to create a "safer nation" with less inward violence. This is not done simply with the removal of guns, but takes far more effort.
Something that everyone can agree on, is that gun owners should be educated. Not only on the proper use of weaponry, but proper storage, safety awareness, rules and regulations of gun ranges, as well as the responsibility that comes with gun ownership.

There are many however, that believe the freedom to own weapons is an unalienable right. That their right to own and operate weapons is written in the constitution, and any law that prohibits them from using and carrying their weapons is infringing on the 2nd amendment (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). While this counterargument is valid, it does not take into account that the Bill of Rights, which was written over 300 years ago, has always been subject to interpretation from an ever changing government. For example, the eight amendment clearly states "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." However people are still put to death for crimes. Some people feel this clearly violates the "cruel and unusual punishment" section of the amendment. Laws are always subject to interpretation. Perhaps if the founding fathers could see what the semi-automatic weapons of today are capable of doing, they may have been more clearer on the second amendment.

Another argument against gun regulation, states that taking guns off of the streets will not make them disappear, it will only increase illegal gun smuggling and place more cash and guns in the hands of criminals. While this point is valid, we have to think of the greater good in the end. Lets use methamphetamines for example. If it was legal for meth to be sold in supermarkets. How many new citizens will become meth addicts? How much more meth would be created and sold in our society? A lot like methamphetamines, guns will never fully disappear, no matter how illegal we make them. A lot of gun related accidents happen when kids find guns. More regulation leads to an overall decrease of guns in homes, which creates a ripple effect of less gun related accidents.

So many Americans feel very passionately about gun regulation one way or the other, that it seems only a compromise, or middle ground, would make both sides moderately happy. A prevention of future gun violence lies in education, reform, and regulation. First we need to have all gun owners registered and educated about proper use and storage. This could be done by implementing a gun regulation law, that would require all assault weapons to be banned for citizens who do not possess the required permit (such as retired military personal) Only certain citizens would able to obtain this permit after mandatory instructional classes, and basic psychic exam. Background checks are mandatory for all gun owners. New guns (non assault) may be obtained with a license, after a 14 day waiting period. All guns need to be registered with the ATF. Its up to the country to decide how this would play out. Problems will continue to arise, and arguments will continue to be made. Problems like making assault weapons illegal would also take them out of the hands of well adjusted citizens. And making them illegal would create the daunting task of removing them from the hands of current gun owning citizens. This would prove quite a problem as there are people that would and are willing to fight rather than give up their guns.


#1 gun control is a heavy subject.

...needs to be regulated

...educated

...family safety in mind

#2 anti gun control arguments

...2nd amendment - up for interpretation (just like the rest of them)

...taking them off the streets wont make them disappear

...only increase gun smuggling

#3 what should we do?

educate

gun classes, permits

veteran permits

gun permit regulation.

Formal Paper First Draft

Chris Breuner
Knapp
English 1A
5/19/13

     With the topic of gun control and regulation comes countless arguments stemming from all directions. From some, a need to protect the rights of Americans under the second amendment, and from others, the desire to protect their families and live in a less armed country. From the drafting of the constitution, gun control has been a topic for discussion. Many feel that the right to own a weapon of their choice is written in the constitution, while others say it doesn't apply to heavy weaponry.....

#1 gun control is a heavy subject.

...needs to be regulated

...educated

...family safety in mind

#2 anti gun control arguments

...2nd amendment - up for interpretation (just like the rest of them)

...taking them off the streets wont make them disappear

...only increase gun smuggling

#3 what should we do?

educate

gun classes, permits

veteran permits

gun permit regulation.

 

Annotated Bibliography

 Annotated Bibliography

Whitney, Craig R.  Living with guns : a liberal's case for the Second Amendment. New York : Public Affairs, 2012. Print.

 

While gun control is trending in the media, there is no absence of books and journals on the subject. It seems that gun control and regulation has been a disputed topic since this country was founded. This book called to me because while researching the counter argument of anti-gun regulation, I realized that the second amendment argument is quite valid. Its simply a matter of interpretation. I needed to do more research as I could see plainly how others would interpret stricter gun control as infringing on the second amendment. I believe that this book will be a great asset in my argument, and strengthen my knowledge of the counter argument.

 

"The Case for Gun Policy Reforms in America." Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 2013. Web. May 2013.

I believe that this 12 page PDF will be one of the largest assists I have for writing my paper. It contains less of an argument, and more pact full research facts provided by the John Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research. It opens up with recent statistics about gun violence and how its affecting the country, then provides background for current gun laws and regulations. This article also brought to my attention a new argument out of their data. A large percentage of gun offenders are very young and many underage. Creating an environment making guns harder to come by would mean reducing a lot of the guns to fell into kids hands. Whether its an inattentive parent that no longer purchased a gun due to them being harder to purchase, or less on the streets to make their way to the kids who seek them out. In just a few pages this article expanded my argument and backed them up with valuable statistics.

http://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/johns-hopkins-center-for-gun-policy-and-research/publications/WhitePaper102512_CGPR.pdf

 

Rhetorical Analysis

David Kupelian has quite a few things to say about this generation. I believe his passion for his studies and the love of his son are what stir such an emotional response through his writing. In the first few pages alone, Kupelian uses a number of rhetorical devices to prove his point and reach out to his audience. While I believe his opinion is slightly misguided and a little biased. The points he makes are no less valid.
In the first paragraph describes his situation with his son. The situation being the once independent boy scout falling victim to peer influence and current social trends. He uses this entire scenario to exemplify what he believes is happening to the vast majority of today's youth. He believes much of the blame lies in the media of today and rap music. Using cause and effect, he explains how the culture of rap music affected the kids and their "hard" attitudes were emulated, creating a "gangsta nation." While I agreed with his argument for the most part, there was no part that I agreed with more than the corporates trying to capture the spirit of the youth and reflect it back as paid advertising. I watched the Disney channel the other day and was disgusted at the amount of adverting and messages that were being thrown tossed around. I believe he illustrated his point beautifully buy using the exemplification of sprite.It was unpopular until it started funding hip hop shows and made itself to be the drink of that generation. Something Kupelian called a "Brilliant marketing Scheme"
In short, Kupelian uses several (if not all) listed rhetorical devices in his persuasive argument. While I don't agree with his ideals of a "home schooled" generation for several reasons, I believe he comes from a place of caring whose writing only furthers my trust in his argument. He may be misinformed about all of today's generation, and a little biased, but his examples and arguments are strong and give a good amount of information. The use of all of his rhetorical devices only strengthen his writing and the amount of persuasion in the information presented.

     If I had the ability to change my society, it would probably be something along the lines of massive social reform, not something as simple as what I'm discussing here. However, due to the fact that this exercise is limited to one particular choice, I would have to choose the currently trending topic that is very controversial in the United States today. The topic of gun control has been discussed and worked over in the media what seems like every day since the tragic Newtown Connecticut incident. People arguing for and against gun control, background checks, and regulation. My first order of business, would be to implement a gun regulation law, that would require all assault weapons to be banned for all citizens who do not possess the required permit. Only certain citizens would able to obtain this permit after mandatory instructional classes, and basic psychic exam. Background checks are mandatory for all gun owners. New guns (non assault) may be obtained without a license, after a 14 day waiting period. All guns are to be registered with the ATF.
     A common argument I hear against the illegalization of assault weapons is something along the lines of "Making them illegal wont take them off the street, meth is illegal, and its still on the street." While this is true, its an awful argument because methamphetamines were made legal, the amount of meth users would increase. Making it illegal severely cuts down the amount on the street.
     In short, if I were to construct an entire gun regulation proposition, I would probably have to spend a bit more time considering all the factors, like the one that making assult weapons ilegal would also take them out of the hands of well adjusted citizens. And making them illegal would create the daunting task of removing them from the hands of current gun owning citizens. Good luck in the deep south.

Personal Reflection

What I've learned in English 1A

Although Persepolis was the feature of my last semester's history class, the book and continuing issues that surround the US and Middle East remain as pertinent as always. What was fascinating to me was the amount of detail and information that the small groups presented. Last semester I was given the historical background and key events surrounding Persepolis, however what I lacked was the cultural ties and traditions that gives the book context. This class provided a much needed amount of background information, that brings the story together, and sheds more light on the conflicts of the Middle East.
Along with the cultural analysis of persepolis, I learned valuable skills including the proper usage of MLA format, and the formation of a TEA paragraph. Most of the time I assumed that quotes speak for themselves. However in light of recent teachings I've learned that not only do I need to backup my quotes with an explanation, I need to introduce them as well, giving the paper a smoother transaction from statement to quote to explanation to analysis.
MLA was a writing style I was always been using, however the finite details of citing sources and proper layout  escaped me in the time between college and high school. It was a much needed review to work in MLA and implement it into our papers and paragraphs.

Persepolis RA 2

Satrapi's Persepolis makes use of visuals to elaborate her point. Accompanying the text are pictures that Satrapi utilizes to explain emotions and situations that text would be difficult to relay. She uses light-hearted humor to counterbalance the grueling situations that arise throughout the entire graphic novel. Throughout the course of the novel, the Author and main character, Marjane, is subjugated to violence and witnesses the horrors of the Islamic Revolution first hand. A picture that particularly stood out to me, takes place on page 72. During this time all the universities have just been closed. Their thinking behind this was that the education system strayed from religious teachings. They believed that "...everything needs to be revised to ensure that our children are not led astray from the true path of Islam." This upsets Marjane incredibly, as she wants to go to collage and study chemistry. In the next panel she explains that "I wanted to be an educated, liberated woman. And if the pursuit of knowledge meant getting cancer, so be it." This panel image depicts an old Marjane laying on her death bed. She is old and wrinkled what she says (what looks like with what might be her last breath) "It's I who discovered the newest radioactive element." This panel alone is a great incite into the character or Marjane. She appears to always have the highest of ambitions, from when she was a six year old girl, throughout the novel and into adolescence. Her desire to succeed and gain knowledge makes her a unique child, and is well portrayed in this single panel.
In Short, Marjane's use of pictures to depict her story, opens up a new world or story portrayal that we would miss out on otherwise. The text explains and educates, while the pictures describe and show. While I don't agree that many books should be graphic novels, this story wouldn't feel the same if it wasn't. The emotion told though the pictures, gives us the second half to the story that we would be clueless to without.

In the second half of Persepolis, Marjane begins her transformation from a child to an adolescent. The war quickly picks up pace. Maryjane realizes this as she sees the F-14s for the first time while their on their way to bomb Tehran. These realizations start to manifest as the struggles of war quickly affect her town and personal life. Stores go empty, and Marjane's mother starts shopping at gas stations. At school Marjane had to perform rituals and funeral marches, where they lined up twice a day to mourn those who had been lost in the war. A rather grueling prospect was that the boys in Marjane's school were given golden plastic keys. Wartime had brought on instantaneous reforms to education. Boys were now on a new training course, all training to become soldiers. They were given the keys and told that if they died in the war, the key would get them into heaven. 

Marjane takes an interest in the western culture, and her parents are amazing permissive. Not long after Anoos's death the borders are reopened. Marjanes parents head off to Turkey and bring her back a michael jackson pin,a denim jacket, and a poster of Kim Wilde and Iron Maiden. Punk rock was in a way an evil from the west that was "plaguing" the Muslim traditions


The already gruesome war continues to get worse. On July 1982 Marjane and her family go to her aunts. a this point in the war any slightest resistance to the regime was quickly stifled. Wha

Personal Nar. pt 2

     According to Robin Fox, Author of The Kindness of Strangers, oil was not the largest reason for invading the Middle East. In order to increase national security, it was deemed wise to at least plant the seed of liberal democracies in the heart of an otherwise Arab totalitarianism culture. This turned out to be much more of a challenge than first thought.  The Kindness of Strangers gives us several examples of why it would be so hard for the peoples of Iraq and the Middle East to establish such a government.
     The problem in uniting the Iraq people is that many of them are loyal to their own individual "governments." For their entire lives, when their government provided them with little to no resources they turned to their families for help. What continued to evolve out of a lack of organized government, was families sticking together to create paternal based clans. These families would all work for each other invest in each other, and in the case of larger family clans, pay tribute to the "father" of the clan that would distribute the money as he saw fit. There were stories of corrupt Clan leaders that would embezzle their money, abuse their power, and even go to war with other clans, however for the people of Iraq whose roads were paved and farms fertilized by their own family, the prospect of a foreign country trying to create a new government in their homeland, seemed quite unappealing, almost degrading. While these Clans proved for the most part, successful in benefiting the families well-being (for the most part) the Iraq Government does not recognize them as having any political recourse.
     Located in Baghdad are some of the more powerful families. In 2003 A reporter for the New York Times by the name of John Tierney, realized that every week in his Baghdad hotel were weddings in which cousins were marrying cousins and more often than not they were first cousins. They were usually from the same paternal clan as well, however sometimes like in Saddam Hussein's case, it was was a woman from the mothers paternal clan. These families were choosing the "Mafia Solution," keeping the marriage in the family, which is one commonest form of preferred marriage in Arab society.  When the reporter asked why they chose to marry their cousins, they replied "Of course we marry a cousin. What would you have us do, marry a stranger?." The "trust no strangers" mentality is quite common among the Paternal Clans and to a lot of the Iraq people. Knowing this, it makes perfect sense why we met so much resistance establishing our influence in the Middle East.

Work Cited
Fox, Robin. "The Kindness of Strangers" spcoety 44.6 (2007): 164-70. Print

Reader Responce, Persepolis

The graphic novel begins with a brief explanation of the events surrounding the Islamic revolution. Marjane is a 6 year old girl caught in the heart of the revolution. The first chapter is called The Veil because In 1980 a new law passed stating that veils were required at all times in school. Marjane hates this new law.

    Every night she has conversations with God. From this young age she decided she wanted to be a prophet. She feels the suffrage of the poor and the pain in weak and the elderly. When she tells this to her teacher, her teacher become concerned and called her parents in for a talk. Her parents are active demonstrators against the Shah, and Marjane wants nothing more than to join them and their protest.

    Marjane's Parents of course, would never let her go because the protests were so dangerous. Shah soldiers would shoot into the crowds, and they would retaliate by throwing stones. This part of the story (explained by a few panels of simple, black and white pictures) was the part that took me back the most. Marjane wanted only to join her parents in protest, even though they were returning every night battered and bruised from the days demonstration. Its hard to imagine what this would feel like if you were just a young girl to witness your country in such a struggle and your parents working so hard with all the other citizens. I'm sure it would be confusing and extremely hard to understand.

The second chapter tells us about the Rex Cinema Massacre. The Shah was trying to gain support against a group of religious terrorists, however his plan backfired. From the story it seemed like the Rex Cinema was set on fire and police were told not to go in and rescue the victims. This seems like an obvious give away that the Shah had something to do with it (the people evidently thought this too). It reminded me of the 9/11 conspiracy theory. The one that stated that our government staged 9/11 in order to gain national support to move in and secure oil in the Middle East. While I personally don't believe this theory, its a strikingly similar comparison. 

In short I believe the first few chapters of Persepolis are filled with so much information about the Islamic Revolution and the events that coincide, its hard to actually take it all in the first time. The story is in the form of a graphic novel, but the pictures depict an entire, almost separate but parallel story in themselves. Reading though the words is one part, but to truly understand the entirety of the story requires a lot of slow reading along with much slower interpretation of the pictures. Not just the background, but the expressions, banners, signs, and emblems that are littered throughout persepolis.

Personal Narrarative -The Evils of the West

The title of my group's subject is also a lose synopsis of the article we were required to read (The Kindness of Strangers, among other articles of Harper's Magazine) The article starts with making a comparison of our involvement in Iran with the unheeded warnings of Laocoon to his fellow Trojans, and gives an alternate perspective to how and why we invaded and continued our presence in the middle east. According to the article, oil wasn't the largest reason for invading the middle east. In order to increase national security, it would be wise to at least plant the seed of liberal democracies in the heart of an otherwise Arab totalitarianism culture.
The author continues to talk about other reasons for the invasion of Iran other than the "weapons of mass destruction" such as the billions that stand to be made by the dealing of arms. She compares it to the initial desires of the Catholic Missionaries and their holy regime to "free the heathens from satin." It creates quite an interesting comparison as they can be directly related to one another. During the Spanish inquisition, thousands of priests and missionaries wandered the land attempting to gain knowledge, explore the land, convert the locals and spread the word of God. However they were also after spreading the catholic church as far as they could. This means obtaining power, wealth, and gold. Whether in the name of the church or not, Catholic missionaries went to many different parts of the world to do this very thing. When the United states invaded Iran, it was to stop nuclear weapons, but while we were there, it was simple to spread the word of liberal democracy, and why not secure our future in the oil industry as well?
The author uses a variety of poems and recent art and publishings to give a bit of background. In short I thoroughly enjoyed the article and the other perspective of the Iran Iraq conflict from something other than the media.

I am...

I am human. I am a 4th semester computer science major who neglected his general math and English courses until this year, and will be transferring next fall to Oregon State. Ive never been in a class that incorporates blogging and am excited to see how it plays out instead of the usual paper per week. I don't have any experience with it, however I have read many blogs, both personal and community based, and am looking forward to making my own. I'm looking forward to reading about the evil influences of the west (from the other perspective) and hope to bring a positive attitude to the group and the class. As far as skills that will be an asset to the class, I am a comp science major and hopefully my computer skills will help my group. I also have an uncanny ability to google things and select the best site from the top 3 that show up, making me a highly valuable research asset.

I have already read Persepolis in my last class (world history) so its all pretty fresh in my mind. I'm looking forward to hearing and reading about the other portrayals of the book. I enjoyed it because it was one of the first graphic novels that Ive ever read and I think it leaves the story more open to interpretation.

In short I'm looking forward to this class and creating a blog. I am looking forward to the discussion regarding the evils of west, along with some debate with my group and other students in the class.