TOW #11 - Text

In response to the recent shootings in San Bernardino, California on December 2, 2015, the New York Times' editorial board made a statement that the gun epidemic in America should be ended. Although there have been many shootings, both related to extremist groups and not, in the past few years, this event had been the largest and deadliest terrorist attack since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. In their article, the board mentions these shootings to reason why gun control should be enforced more than it is now. They also allude to our politicians who "offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killings." Though their purpose of writing this editorial is to argue for stricter gun control laws, they acknowledge the impracticality in allowing citizens to bear firearms while keeping them from criminals. That's why they justify their argument by stating that only "certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed from civilian ownership." I thought that their argument and use of relative events was convincing and effective because of their well-supported statements and I agree that change must be brought to the issue of gun control.