The author discusses the issue of gun control versus gun rights. He states, Gun rights organizations have been more successful than gun control organizations because they have been paying off and supporting a lot more important people than the gun control organizations.” He adds that gun rights organizations, like the National Rifle Association, have given more than $17 million dollars in contributions to federal candidates and political party committees since 1989, while gun control organizations have only given $1.
The author seems to base his whole argument on how much money gun rights organizations, mainly the National Rifle Association, have given. He really seems to focus a lot on the NRA. The author states that the NRA wields an enormous amount of influence in Washington. The source of that influence is money.” The National Rifle Association is by far the gun rights lobby’s biggest donor, having contributed more than $14 million dollars to federal candidates and political party committees since 1989.
The author did not count contributions from individuals. According to America’s First Freedom, Globalist billionaire George Soros is pouring perhaps as much as $30 million into left-wing gun control organizations and political party committees” (Norell, 37). Gun rights organizations do give money to different political party committees, but they are simply supporting the candidates that support the Second Amendment.
The editorial was supposed to be about how gun control or gun rights will affect the American people, but it turned into a discussion of how the NRA is controlling the battle between gun control and gun rights. The only thing relevant to the effect on the American people was the statement that it will be a key issue in the presidential election because most Democrats feel that their support of the assault weapons ban cost them control of the House and Senate in 1994, and that the gun control issue hurt Al Gore’s standing in key states during the 2000 presidential election.” I believe that the presidential election is important, but the editorial should have delved into more detail about how crime would increase or decrease if guns were taken out of the hands of citizens. The editorial would have been much better if the author had included statistics from countries with extreme gun control, such as Great Britain, where not even the police carry guns, or from the Netherlands, where citizens over the age of 18 are required to carry a gun.
Overall, the editorial had some good points and pieces of information, but I feel that his argument was weak. Instead of discussing what would be better for the American people, he rambled on about how the NRA is like a monopoly when it comes to gun control and the Second Amendment. He also lacked information on gun control groups and focused mostly on gun rights groups and their supporters.
Works Cited: Anonymous. Gun Control vs.”
Gun Rights.” OpenSecrets.org. 9/10/04.
On September 13, 2004, James O. Norell wrote an article about guns on opensecrets.org.
The Man Who Would Be King.” America’s First Freedom, Vol. 5, No. 4, edited by Mark Chesnut, Fairfax, VA.
National Rifle Association. Pages 37-38.
