For your Research Paper, you must complete an Annotated Bibliography for your research. You must use at least 5 sources and your Annotated Bibliography should both summarize and analyze your research. In your annotation, I want you to summarize the content of your source. Then I would like you to discuss its strengths, weaknesses, and/or if there are any biases. Your Annotated Bibliography must include 5 sources and follow the MLA style of documentation. Make sure you review the Sample Bibliography for the correct format as points will be deducted for incorrect format. An explanation of Annotated Bibliographies can be found under Instructional Materials in the Module.
An Annotated Bibliography on Gun Control in America
Fu, Yubo, et al. “Epidemic vs. pandemic: A visual data analysis of gun deaths Vs. COVID-19 deaths in the United States of America.” (2021).
In this source, an analysis is conducted on the deaths that have happened due to guns and firearms and a comparison has been drawn to the deaths that have occurred due to the disease Covid-19. The reasoning behind choosing these two is that these two phenomena are mostly responsible for unnatural deaths in America. In this analysis, each state was ranked based on its safety, in terms of the Coronavirus pandemic and gun violence. Their level of safety was decided based on the number of deaths that occurred in that state due to Covid-19 and firearms. The result produced showcased that the safety of a state is mainly dependent on three factors which were independent variables. These variables were ideological leanings, gun laws, and unemployment rates. The analysis presented also discarded one of NRA’s main arguments that mental health conditions were responsible for deaths by guns. This factor had almost no effect on the safety of a particular state. Through the analysis, it was absolutely clear that to make a state safe it is extremely necessary to have proper and apt gun control laws since they seem to increase the overall safety of a particular state.
The main strength of this source is that it is based on data that can be verified. This increases the reliability of the resource, as there is a negligible chance of falsification. The weakness of this source is that ultimately it does not provide a solid conclusion about which turned out to be more deadly for Americans, Coronavirus or Gun violence. Throughout the analysis, there was no bias present, and there was no attempt to prove a certain argument, hence the source can be categorized as unbiased.
Arden, Andrew J. “Mass Incarceration, Deprivation of Rights, and Racial Subordination: US v. Gary, the American Gun Control Narrative, and Ugly Truth behind Sec. 18 USC 922 (g).” NCCRL Rev. 2 (2022): 141.
This source details the reasoning behind revisiting and reformulating Gun control laws in America. In the last few decades, there have been several cases of Black civilians being unjustly attacked by firearms because of racially motivated reasons. The source explains that the present Gun control laws are insufficient because they are formulated in such a manner, that is unfair to Black people. The source also explains the case United States v. Gary, which showcases the way people of color suffer in the judicial system. The source proves that there is a disparity in the rights provided to carry firearms to White people in comparison to Black people. This disparity is extremely dangerous as various government policies make it extremely easy, for Black people to be attacked with a firearm such as the ‘War on Drugs’. The policy of the ‘War on Drugs’ allowed police officials to openly search and gave them considerable license to attack people of color, with the aid of firearms. This methodology of formulating policies that put Black people in danger has been the pattern of the US government since its inception. After emancipation laws were made that made it extremely difficult for Black people to garner firearms, which allowed white people to continue to terrorize them. Hence the source concludes that the Gun control laws should be revisited, and reformulated so that America as a country is safe for Black people.
The strength of the source is that it describes the history of Gun control laws since the Civil War in a detailed manner, which provides a lot of necessary information to truly understand the disparity that is still present. The weakness of the source lies in the fact that it does not provide a lot of data on other cases, instead, it focuses only on one case to maintain the focus of the reader. There is no bias present in the source as it presents the situation at hand fairly along with clarity.
Mazur, Karol. “The” GOOD GUY WITH A GUN” CONCEPT IN THE AMERICAN GUN CULTURE AND GUN CONTROL POLICY.” Scientific Journal of Bielsko-Biala School of Finance and Law 25.2 (2021): 5-10.
This source focuses on one of the biggest arguments that are applied by Gun ownership advocates. This argument is known as “Good Guy with a Gun”. This argument became popular, especially after the Sandy Hook incident. After this incident, the advocates began to spread the perception, that to protect themselves the best method is to be armed. The source explains this concept by emphasizing what pertains to a Good Guy, and can any person with the stress of human life be ‘good’ all the time. Therefore, in such a situation should they be given such a large authority and power through firearms. The source also analyses the systematic manner in which this concept is spread through mainstream media, especially with examples of people in the West, through movies and books. The source states that these examples are not apt as many of these figures are based on people who did not use firearms to protect themselves but to keep the slaves in control. This in turn caused a wide gap in the power structure present between the owners and the slaves, and they began to kill slaves for extremely petty and small reasons. Therefore, those people were never really the good guys.
The strength of this source is in the manner in which it analyses the concept from all perspectives, like historical? and individualistic. This makes the process of understanding the source extremely easy. The weakness of the source is primarily that it doesn’t delve deep into the mental health issues that are very commonly undetected in today’s world, about the concept. The source is not biased and analyses the concept from a fair and just lens.
Fleming, Anthony, Dylan S. McLean, and Raymond Tatalovich. “Debating gun control in Canada and the United States: divergent policy frames and political cultures.” World Affairs 181.4 (2018): 348-371.
This source compares the treatment of gun control laws and provisions in Canada as compared to America. The source states that this difference is mainly because of the political culture. The difference in political culture is visible from the fact that the Canadian constitution does not recognize the right to bear arms as a fundamental right while America does, for various historical reasons. It is because of these historical reasons that it is easier to mobilize people in Canada to support the issue of gun control, but that is not the case for America. The mass shooting incidents that have occurred in Canada, were publically accepted as being caused due to lack of gun-control laws which led to the firearms reaching the wrong hands. The ‘historical reasons’ do not allow such a consensus to occur in the United States of America. It is mostly the Democrats who are in favor of gun control, which is not enough to bring significant political change. Moreover, the partial treatment done by various elements of mainstream media like The New York Times towards people supporting the carrying of guns does more harm than good. It makes people think that there is some kind of ulterior motive, which is related to compromising certain human rights. In comparison, Canada’s popular Newspapers have shown equal treatment towards both thought processes.
The strength of the source is that it compares both countries in all aspects, therefore providing as much information as possible. The weakness of the source was that the historical reasons behind the present political culture of America were not analyzed properly. The source presented its findings in an unbiased manner.
Fox, James Alan, and Emma E. Fridel. “The menace of school shootings in America.” The Wiley handbook on violence in education: Forms, factors, and preventions (2018): 15-35.
This source focuses on the school shooting and how its effect has been severely ignored by the administration, resulting in ignorance towards gun control laws. In the early 90s when the school shootings began there was a huge effort by the advocates of gun ownership to create a narrative that all of it was a conspiracy theory that was formulated by Clinton. Thereafter the problem of terrorism took attention away from the issue of the school shooting. Then after the incidents of shooting began again, especially with the incident of Sandy Hook, the focus went more on character development. People were more worried about improving the character of students so that they were not compelled to commit such an act rather than preventing such horrid incidents from happening by creating and formulating policies. Thereafter the focus was shifted to the economic problems. The reason these shootings also failed to attain constant attention was that mainstream media failed to classify them as a particular crime of a similar nature. The intent of the shooters and the number of victims in such events vary which changes the nature of the shooting in front of the public. The source details the various problems present in formulating strong gun control laws.
The strength of the source lies in the fact that it details the various mechanisms used in America to avoid attaching the due severity that is needed to the crime of school shootings. The weakness of the source lies in the fact that it does not emphasize the problem posed by the media. The source is unbiased and looks at the matter objectively.
