[1] end up getting shot that way. Halbrook’s counterargument

1

2

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

3

4

5

6

7

8

            Between the three
authors, Aninsi and Stroebe would most likely disagree the most. Stroebe argues
that there needs to be a culture change in America’s attitude towards guns (as
implied by the title of his paper) because he thinks that for this reason that
we cannot have a conversation on how to fix this problem with increased gun
control or much less even get any gun legislation done in the United States. He
also believes that organizations like the NRA

            Two pieces of literature I read for
my culture hypothesis are pro-gun and they both argue or at least imply that
gun culture is not directly linked on gun violence in the United States. Although
they seem to be on the same side, while Aninsi tries to look at the root of
what creates our gun culture and why America should not mess with it in the
first place, Halbrook debunks the culture argument entirely with Switzerland as
an example. Halbrook brings up every argument brought up in the United States,
explains how those same arguments apply to Switzerland, and explains why it is
wrong. For example, main points made by anti-gun lobbyists is that 6if
there are more guns then there are more homicides, banning them will save
lives, and that if everyone is armed then that would be counterintuitive and
more people would end up getting shot that way. Halbrook’s counterargument to
those kinds of arguments would be that Switzerland’s largest city of Zurich
celebrates guns by holding two large gun themed holidays and despite this it is
7held
as the best city in the world as well as one of the safest. One counterargument
he would make specifically addressing the “we do not need more of our citizens
to be armed” is that a large number of citizens in Switzerland are armed and
once again it still is one of the safest cities in the world. 8Switzerland
is ranked third in civilian gun ownership with about 3.4 million firearms for
their population of about 8 million.

Connections, Contrasts, and Synthesis

            Another article I read was “Effect
of Gun Culture and Firearm Laws on Gun Violence and Mass Shootings in the
United States: A Multi-Level Quantitative Analysis” by Frederic Lemieux.
Lemieux directly does a study on a possible correlation between gun culture and
mass shootings, homicides, and gun violence along with other factors that may
cause these events as well. When talking about culture, he starts with the
stand your ground law and how it is “rooted in American culture have easy
access to firearms and the enactment of laws that authorize citizens to use a
gun in public spaces to defend themselves.”5  In the actual study itself, he organizes it into
a three-level, cross-sectional approach. The macro level is based on an international
comparison between 25 developed countries. It is also based on military expenditure
because war culture and militarization of several sectors of the society that ascribe
value to the use of military tools and tactics to resolve social problems are linked
based on numerous studies.

            The next article I read on gun
culture’s effect on gun violence was called 3″Antagonisms
and the Discursive Sedimentation of American Gun Culture: A New Framework” by
Alexei Anisin. Anisin takes a more historical look at our gun culture and where
it comes from. He believes that our gun culture stems from the second amendment
to the constitution that gives man right to bear arms to protect us from
tyranny as well as anarchy. Anisin also says that the right to bear arms is an
individual freedom and a collective freedom and says that “if individuals do
not have the ability to obtain or access firearms, they will no longer be
living in a country that provides them with”4
these values. Aninsi also did acknowledge the costs of the right for citizens
to bear arms which is gun violence and how the second amendment does not seem
to take that into account.  

The
first two pieces of literature I read on this were 1″Citizens
in Arms: The Swiss Experience” by Stephen P. Halbrook and 2″Firearm
Availability and Violent Death: The Need for a Culture Change in Attitudes
toward Guns” by Wolfgang Stroebe. These both take two different sides and
have two different approaches. Halbrook just talks about how gun culture is not
the problem and talks about how little gun violence occurs in Switzerland
despite them also having a big gun culture arguably more popular than that of
the United States. Stroebe on the other hand does not exactly address any kind
of causal relation between gun culture and gun violence but instead talks about
why whether or not there is any kind of relation between the two, real gun
control legislation can never be passed anyways due to the NRA’s heavy
influence in American politics today.