Canestaro 1

Andrea Canestaro
Dr. Cassel
English 2 Online
29 June 2019
Annotated Bibliography

I chose the issue of gun violence for my research topic and how stricter gun laws would

affect it. I am also hoping to understand what leads people to choose gun violence and how our

country can lower this. Do we need stricter gun laws, and if so, how would they affect crime

rates and violence?

DeGrazia, David, and Lester H. Hunt. Debating Gun Control: How Much Regulation Do We

Need? Oxford University Press, October 20, 2016. Oxford Scholarship Online. Accessed

<https://www-oxfordscholarship-com.sinclair.ohinet.org/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/97801

90251253.001.0001/acprof-9780190251253>.

Debating Gun Control: How Much Regulation Do We Need? is a book I found online

written from the perspective of two authors. The book is divided into two categories where

David DeGrazia presents his beliefs for stronger gun regulations while Lester H. Hunt argues

against gun control. The chapters or sections are broken down into further topics and arguments,

such as the Second Amendment, self-defense, and the ethics behind guns. Readers are left to

choose which argument they side best with.

From a book with two different perspectives, the authors are allowing the reader to

evaluate the pros and cons of each side and determine a viewpoint for themselves, or perhaps,

become more educated on a belief they already have. If a reader already has strong beliefs, this

could also allow someone to change their stance on an issue, or at least see the argument from a
 Canestaro 2

different perspective. For being published in 2016, this work has a current look on gun debate

topics and issues.

The writers, David DeGrazia and Lester H. Hunt, are both professors of philosophy at

George Washington University and the University of Wisconsin. After doing further research, I

discovered David DeGrazia has written many other books dealing with ethics and human

identity. Lester H. Hunt has also written other books closely tied with ethics and philosophy.

Both bring their knowledge of philosophy to the table and incorporate it into Debating Gun

Control. This book has been published as an eBook online as well as physical copies being sold

around the U.S. and has been presented with high reviews.

For my current questions, this article is an excellent source from seeing the argument on

both sides in major detail. I will focus more on the topic of the Second Amendment, self-defense,

and responsible public policy for my questions.

Ingraham, Christopher. "Guns are responsible for the largest share of U.S. homicides in over 80

years, federal mortality data shows." Washingtonpost.com, 2 Apr. 2018. Opposing

Viewpoints in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A533078667/ OVIC?u=dayt3

0401&sid=OVIC&xid=d935aaa6. Accessed 28 June 2019.

“Guns are responsible for the largest share of U.S. homicides in over 80 years, federal

mortality data shows” by Christopher Ingraham highlights the crime issue of guns and firearms.

Ingraham uses data of gun homicides over the years showing how the amount of deaths in the

U.S. have drastically risen following the growing popularity of firearm sales and how this issue

can possibly increase in the future. The article further explains that these high rates have to do
 Canestaro 3

with more and more guns being sold out on the black market to those who are not permitted to

own them.

The writer is siding with the belief for stronger gun laws and restrictions and is

persuading readers who are interested in the gun debate to do the same. He is also trying to target

those who share different beliefs by incorporating the rising numbers and how they relate to gun

popularity. This news story was written about a year ago, so the facts and topics are still relevant.

I found a page on The Washington Post which gave a summary of the author. Christopher

Ingraham has been writing about issues of gun policy and data for The Washington Post. He also

previously worked at the Brookings Institution and the Pew Research Center. The news source

also referenced in the article where they obtained the data from.

I will use this article as a strong basis for addressing the side of pro-gun control. It

answers most of my questions provided in my research proposal for gun regulations and laws

and contains a strong amount of data to incorporate into my final argument.

Just Facts. Just Facts, 2007, www.justfacts.com. Accessed 23 June 2019.

When looking for suitable websites to do research off, justfacts.com caught my attention.

This website has a section of their webpage dedicated to gun control with data and statistics that

are pulled from various resources. Some other major subjects discussed include abortion,

healthcare, immigration, and a lot of other areas that are currently up for debate in the news. For

gun control, Just Facts alludes to background checks, right-to-carry laws, the Constitution, and

other subjects of gun control which are broken down into smaller data.
 Canestaro 4

The purpose of the whole website is to provide people with solid and bias free research

on current issues and topics. On the main page, “Learn the facts. Decide for yourself.” is stated.

Instead of providing information from the perspective of a certain argument, Just Facts literally

gives you “just facts”. This source would be good for anyone who is looking for a logical side to

support or defend their argument. The current date does not affect this source, since the facts are

presented with the year they were researched. These are also good to look back on for changes

throughout time.

There is not one writer for any of the information on gun control, since there are so many

updates to make on the research presented. The website has been updated over time, and many

large organizations such as IBM and The Washington Post have cited to it. Just Facts also has a

page dedicated to its standards of credibility.

With my research topic of the impact of stricter gun laws on homicides, this is an

excellent source to use for data-based evidence. Since this source does not lean towards one

particular side or argument, it will be resourceful for incorporating the Second Amendment,

crime, and self-defense into my final report.

Lu, Yu, and Jeff R. Temple. “Dangerous Weapons or Dangerous People? The Temporal

Associations between Gun Violence and Mental Health.” Preventive Medicine, vol. 121,

Apr. 2019, pp. 1–6. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.01.008.

Researcher Yu Lu discusses how there is not a direct link between mental health issues

and committing violence with a gun in her academic article. Through relevant data, most mental

health issues such as PTSD, anxiety, or depression do not have a connection to crimes committed
 Canestaro 5

with guns. In other words, mental health issues are not the main contributing factor towards gun

violence. Lu uses data from high school students and young adults along with statistics in her

research.

“Dangerous Weapons or Dangerous People? The Temporal Associations between Gun

Violence and Mental Health.” sheds light on the topic of mental illness and the issue of gun

violence. The author hopes to persuade and inform people of gun violence with a main emphasis

on how mental health is not directly connected to this issue.

Yu Lu, Ph.D., works in research and is the lead analysis of the study at the University of

Texas. This study was published in 2019 so the research is fresh and can be applied to current

events and the debate today. This research comes from the medical branch of the University of

Texas.

This resource helps provide information for my question dealing with contributing factors

leading to gun violence. I will use this source to further analyze what other factors can contribute

to people buying and owning guns.

Mantel, Barbara. "Gun Control, Should Lawmakers Tighten Firearm restrictions?" CQ

Researcher, 8 Mar. 2013, pp. 233-56, library.cqpress.com/cqresrre2013030800.

“Should Lawmakers Tighten Firearm Restrictions?” gives an in-depth overview for the

many arguments of the gun control debate happening today in the news. The research provides

news events, charts, and statistics. For instance, there is a chart provided which breaks down the

design of an AR-15 Rifle.

 Canestaro 6

The author uses this information to inform the reader of both sides of the argument and

the perspectives that come with each side. This article can be good for anyone who would like to

be more educated on the debate and possibly form a side as well. This article was written back in

2013, which concludes that some of the facts and statistics can be out of date. (how did this

affect it)

The author of this article, Barbara Mantel, holds a bachelor's degree in history and

economics and a master’s in economics. This degree can tie to what is being discussed and the

relevance of the article. Sources of information are also referenced at the bottom of the page. I

used this article directly from CQ Researcher. Since this article was covered back in 2013, some

of the charts and research is out of date. After reading through the article, it still discusses

relevant topics from the debate which have not changed much, and an explanation on early gun

culture.

I will use the information presented in the article to transition into the main questions of

my research. This article is a good resource since it provides an overview with many statistics

and research provided for proving if we need stricter gun laws or not. It does not focus on one

side and is a free-for-all information source.

ProCon.org. “Gun Control ProCon.org.” ProCon.org, 2 May 2019, gun-control.procon.org.

Accessed 23 June 2019.

ProCon.org discusses current events that are debatable and presents the top arguments for

each side of the issue. For my research questions, I browsed through the gun control portion of

the website for arguments. There is also a page which summarizes the historical background of
 Canestaro 7

gun control and how it started with the Second Amendment to our constitution. Other specific

areas compare rates for deaths by guns in U.S. to different countries, as well as gun ownership

rates.

Like the online book, Debating Gun Control: How Much Regulation Do We Need?, the

purpose of the website is to educate viewers on both sides of the debate. This is a good source for

anyone who would like to be better informed on this topic.

All the pages under the gun control section have been updated within the last year and

sources are listed on a footnotes and sources page for additional resources used. The only issue I

had was there was not a single author for any page, since ProCon.org is an institutional author.

However, this could also be good since there are multiple authors with different perspectives and

views on the topic so there is not an underlying issue of bias integrated into the information.

With both sides of the debate, this will help me evaluate both sides of the argument in my

research before reaching my conclusion.

“The Good of the Many: Gun Control and Individual Rights.” Films Media Group, 1996,

digital.films.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx?wID=19259&xtid=6382. Accessed 23 June 2019.

This film produced by the University of Notre Dame brings forth the attention of the gun

control debate and the many different views that reside with this issue. Many people of different

backgrounds are interviewed in this 30-minute film who all have various opinions about stricter

gun regulations. There is also a large emphasis placed on the Second Amendment and how far

the right to bear arms should extend in our society.

 Canestaro 8

The film’s purpose is to educate people on the tension which is forming between those

who think differently about guns in society. It seems like the maker of this film wants to find

common ground between the two parties and how our beliefs can help bring us closer to talking

the issue.

The University of Notre Dame produced this film back in 1996. 20 years has been a long

time, but it is also interesting to look back on what the time was like and what ideas have further

been resolved today or investigated deeper. I do not think this will be an issue for writing my

research, since most of the people pose the same questions we are still asking in society today.

I will utilize this source for more of the big picture of how people view guns and the issue

that is still happening today. The title of the film relates to the question: What point does the

good of the many outweigh the rights of the individual? I am looking forward to digging deeper

into this question.