Martin, Donald. “LETTER: Guns Don’t Kill People, Etc.” articles.courant.com, Hartford Courant. 19 Mar. 2013. Web. 11 Aug. 2015
In this article, Martin discusses an experiment that he performed and gives us his results. His experiment mocks the idea that people who want guns to be banned believe that guns are the ones who kill people. Martin says how he positions his shotgun in a wheelchair on his front porch to see how many people it will kill. He mentions how many people pass by and yet when he comes back to check on his shotgun it had not killed anyone. He furthers this with, “It had not even loaded itself.” He also says how “surprised” he was because of all the people arguing about guns being dangerous and to find out guns are not the ones who kill people but people who misuse them do or he is “…in possession of the laziest gun in the world.” Martin ends his letter with another representation by saying, “So now I’m off to check on my spoons, because I hear they make people fat.”
Clearly Martin is targeting those who are non advocates of guns. He does this in a ironical way by presenting the gun with human characteristics. Martin claims that these non advocates are over exaggerating on guns by banning them. It is true, unrealistically speaking that guns are the ones who kill people but rather people who handle guns do. In this case, people with guns kill many people, more than they would if they didn’t have guns. People get angry and upset all around the world. Yet, there aren’t any mass shootings every few weeks in Japan for example or in England. The reason for this would be because residents of those places who have these impulses don’t have easy access to lethal weapons and unlimited ammunition. On the other hand, in America it is not difficult to find these firearms because they are everywhere.
Martin’s argument about people being the problem other than guns is not backed up with any evidence. Instead he only uses a fictional situation making his statement invalid. He argues that , “the media is wrong and the killing is by people misusing guns.” Although guns don’t have a mind of their own, the purpose of a firearm is to kill and extinguish a life with the minimum amount of effort possible. These weapons are made to kill at a great distance, speed and lethality. When these weapons do their job in a mass shooting, there is an endless list of excuses blaming things other than the gun itself. Making Martin’s argument about guns not killing people inaccurate because in reality they do. Though it is not relevant to the way Martin puts his dispute.
Overall, the way Martin approaches these controversy affects the effectiveness it would have on his audience. Readers would think he is not trustworthy because he mocks those who don’t agree with him or are on his side of the argument. His response to those who think guns are dangerous is immature and makes his justification seem less convincible.
Totally agree! People kill people, not guns. it really just depends on who has the gun. Honestly, I think that there should be more restrictions when it comes to, who is allowed to own and use a gun. A gun is a deadly weapon and I fins it scary, to know that people have them around in their house. I’m all for “their rights” but their has to be a limit sometimes.
I find Donald’s argument very sarcastic, however he does make a good point. Guns wont kill you but the people will. I feel like that the people who bear a gun feel more safe in todays society. Even if the gun is not used it still helps the people feel safe and secured. Martin tends to have a sense of humor on addressing his argument, he says how he positions his shotgun in a wheelchair on his front porch to see how many people it will kill. This proves his main point.
I think that the beginning of this article was very humorous! I loved this article because it is true that people kill people. I know I would feel awkward owning a gun of my own, I sympathize with the thought that they provide protection in the hands of the right people.
Donald’s argument is sarcastic, and may not appeal to those who oppose guns since he uses a mocking tone. I however agree that guns don’t kill, people kill. I also feel people who bear a gun feel more safe in todays society. And as Marisol said “Even if the gun is not used it still helps the people feel safe and secured.”
The spoon analogy in the first paragraph is pretty funny. Anyway, the argument of that article is humorous in its own dark humor. I agree that the author did not have enough hard evidence to back up his statements though. There should be more gun restriction laws because there have been way too many gun incidents in the US.
I think that the author is trying to exaggerate in order to get people on his side. It seems as though he argument is based on a literal taking of “guns kill people” It leans more to being the easy access to guns allows people to use the guns to kill people. I think that people that actually believe that just anybody should have access to firearms should consider that every person is different.
I really enjoyed reading the introduction to this article and found the last sentence to be a funny joke. I do agree that the writer of the article did not have enough evidence to back up his claims. I also agree with the saying that “people kill people, not guns.” Gun restriction laws can only do so much.
Damn right people kill people. It’s been that way since we evolved and it will be that way until we die. However, it only gets easier with such great gun availability in the U.S. It is obvious that gun control is something that needs to be addressed. An argument that I agree with is that the 2nd Amendment was made during a time in where it was necessary to have firearms to protect one’s liberty. Today that is not that case and therefore I believe that there should be stronger gun control.
Although the article did lack evidence to back up his claim as others suggest, I personally believe his argument really didn’t need any at all. His point was clear and straight to the point in his own humorous and mocking way. An argument that is 100% true. GUNS DO NOT KILL PEOPLE, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. I agree with this statement once again 100%. Whomever is behind that gun is the reason the individual on the other side no longer stands. Would that really require evidence? No it does not. Sure laws can be placed, but the fact of the matter would still be people kill people with the use of a gun, not the gun “itself”.
Although I agree that people kill people I can not ignore the fact that guns are used to do the killing. Therefore I do believe that guns should not be easily accessed. I enjoyed reading this summary because of its accurate satire. However, Martin’s argument would not be the best to use in order to persuade an audience against gun laws because of the way he presents it.
I found Martin’s “experiment” funny. Although it was irrational and unnecessary, I get the point that he makes and I agree that people kill people and not guns. However, guns are somewhat the middle man when it comes to people killing people. There has been a plethora of deaths that have been caused by guns. If gun laws were more strict, wouldn’t it mean people would have less access to misuse guns in the first place?