Revision

What Impact Do Gun Free Zones Really Have?

For my research topic I chose gun free zones. I would like to know more about the actual effects that gun free zones have on the public, not what people want them to do. To do this I will look into the varying ideas on what they should do. For example, are they supposed to reduce mass shootings or accidental shootings? Evaluating the success of gun free zones depends on their intended purpose because the effectiveness changes according to the differing goals. Overall, I want to know if gun free zones serve their purpose. I think that this is an important question because of the rising amount of gun violence around the country. A solution would need to address not only the cause of the shootings, but also the opportunities available to shooters.

I’m no expert in this topic, however I have extensive experience around firearms as I have been a competitive shooter for several years. Because of this, I will have a similar mindset to those arguing against gun free zones, but I plan to research this topic with an open mind and present the facts that I find with as little bias as possible.

To research my topic, I will be looking for articles about gun free zones and their impact, along with studies that report the difference in gun violence before and after gun free zones were introduced. Additionally, I will look for studies that cover any mental similarities between mass shooters in order to find any common traits that shooters share. The articles will help to bring in many points of view, allowing me to cover all the possible effects that gun free zones have. I will be relying on the University’s library database to do most of my research. Also, since it has all the information about the source readily available, I will be able to judge the quality of the source more easily. In addition, I will be searching popular newspapers for articles revolving around this topic as they might encompass more of the public opinion.

I think that it will be hard to find articles that are based on data alone and are not swayed by personal opinion. This might be a challenge because it is a very black and white topic and has such a significant role; one that could potentially cost people their lives. Arguers on both sides are bound to have very polarized opinions. In order to overcome this, I will be looking through a large amount of sources to find ones that rely on data and statistics, rather than just personal opinion.

 

While there may be many solutions to gun violence, gun free zones are currently the most popular. However, while gun free zones appear to reduce the potential for gun violence, how do they actually affect the safety of the public, and what purpose do they really serve? Additionally, what impact would other proposed solutions have?

 

Domenech, Benjamin. “The Truth About Mass Shootings and Gun Control.” Commentary 135.2 (2013): 25-29. Academic Search Complete. Web. 10 Oct. 2015.

This article talks about mass shootings as a whole. It has data about the history of gun violence and compares it to today’s numbers. It also discusses the mental side of mass shootings. Domenech even explains how some of the solutions proposed by politicians would have no effect on mass shootings, which is very useful and I plan to cite these in my paper.

This is a popular source since it comes from Commentary, an online magazine, however, it brings up good data and analyses it well. This is a secondary source. It was published in 2013 so it is current. This source uses data to back up its claims and there is very little bias present.

Fan, Mary D. “Disarming the Dangerous: Preventing Extraordinary and Ordinary Violence.” Indiana Law Journal 90.1 (2015): 151-78. Academic Search Complete. Web. 10 Oct. 2015.

This source contains five charts, one of which shows the percentage of where gun homicides occur. I can use this to support the claim that mass shootings are more likely to occur in gun free zones. It also presents a lot of data relevant to homicides as a whole, which I will use to show how gun violence has changed over the years.

This is a scholarly source since it comes from the Indiana Law Journal and is a secondary source as well. It doesn’t appear to be peer reviewed, but the author is affiliated with Henry M. Jackson, the professor of law at University of Washington School of Law, so it is reasonable to assume that the information is reliable and accurate. It is current because it was published in 2014.

Follman, Mark. “The NRA’s Gun-free Zone Myth.” USA Today. Academic Search Complete. Web. 2 Oct. 2015.

This article supports gun free zones. It does so by disproving many of the opponent’s many claims. It also shows various cases where armed civilians made the situation worse and also shows that shooters don’t target gun free zones.

This source is a popular source since it comes from USA Today, a popular media center. However, it still present viable information and statistics. It can also be considered current as it was published in March 2013, a little over three months after the Newtown shooting. The author shows a clear bias in favor of gun free zones as he doesn’t present many counterarguments, but this source is used to support gun free zones, so his bias is unimportant. This is a secondary source since the author has already interpreted the raw data in order to form his claim.

Grunwald, Michael, and Jay Newton-Small. “Fire Away.” Time 177.3 (2011): 36-39. Academic Search Complete. Web. 11 Oct. 2015.

This source talks about gun control as a whole and the statistics around it. I will use this to back up other claims and arguments about the effect that gun control laws have on the pubic. It also takes a look at policies that were put in for gun control and discusses the impact they have had.

This is a popular source since it comes from Time magazine, a very well known source. It was published in 2011 so it can be considered current as most of the information and ideas will still apply to today. We can assume that the information is reliable because it comes from such a well known magazine, however it is a secondary source.

Kopel, David B. Guns: Who Should Have Them? Amherst, NY: Prometheus, 1995. Print.

This source talks extensively about gun rights as a whole. It also talks specifically about gun free zones and raises many strong arguments against them. Kopel compares gun free zones to the nuclear free zones back in the cold war and how both “only offer the appearance of peace.” I plan to use the data and arguments he presents to strengthen my claim against gun free zones.

This is a scholarly and reliable source since the author is very credible, having many accommodations in the legal field. Because this is the author’s interpretation of the data, this is a secondary source. It was published in 1995 so it is questionable if it can be considered current, therefore I will use the statistics with caution. However, many of the arguments he presents are very logical and can still be applied today. Additionally, because Kopel is such a strong supporter of gun rights, I will have to look out for any instances of bias in his arguments.

Kopel, David B. “Pretend Gun-Free School Zones: A Deadly Legal Fiction.” Connecticut Law Review 42 (2009): 515-84. Web. 2 Oct. 2015.

This journal article argues for the arming of teachers and against schools as gun free zones. The author supports his argument with various examples of the success that arming teachers has had in other countries, including Thailand and Norway. He also presents data showing the effect that less gun free zones would have and even goes into the mental effect it would have on students. To round out his argument, Kopel discusses the objections to school not being a gun free zone.

This source is a scholarly source and is very reliable as it is from the Connecticut Law Journal. However, it isn’t a primary source since it has already interpreted the data. It was published in 2009, making it fairly current. As for bias, the Kopel does a great job showing both sides of the argument, even strengthening his argument while doing so.

Nedzel, Nadia. “Concealed Carry: The Only Way to Discourage Mass School Shootings.” Academic Questions 27.4 (2014): 429-35. Academic Search Complete. Web. 11 Oct. 2015.

This source talks about possible solutions to mass shootings and how the ones in place now are ineffective. The author gives various examples that explain why he thinks gun free zones don’t work like they should and also explains why other solutions wouldn’t work either. He supports allowing concealed carry in places that are gun free zones, such as schools and college campuses, as to not allow a possible shooter to know who is armed and who is not.

While this is a secondary source, it is a scholarly source since it comes from Academic Questions, the official journal for National Scholars, which has been running since 1988. This article was published in 2014 so it can be considered current and while the author has a clear bias against gun free zones, he presents a very logical argument that he further supports with statistics.

Taylor, Danielle. “Gun-Free Zones: Weighing the Pros and Cons.” Parks & Recreation 48.4 (2013): 55. SPORTDiscus. Web. 2 Oct. 2015.

This article is about whether or not national or state parks should be gun free zones. In this, the author argues that parks should not be gun free zones, but he also begins to argue against gun free zones as a whole. He ends his argument by stating “every mass shooting in the U.S. since 1977 … has happened in a gun-free zone.” This might not hold true today since this was published in 2013.

This is a popular source but still presents good data and raises good questions. It was published in April 2013 so we can consider it current. The author presents his side of the argument without showing much bias. This is a secondary source.

US Department of Education. Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools. Report on the Implementation of the Gun-Free Schools Act in the States and Outlying Areas. By Karen Gray-Adams and Beth Sinclair.

This source offers a clear definition of the Gun-Free Schools Act and how it had to be implemented by the states. It also presents a lot of data about the presence of guns in schools. I will use this source in order to clearly show what is required by states when they implement their schools as gun free zones and how some people ignore the fact that schools are gun free zones.

This source is scholarly mainly because it is written by the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools. It is also a primary source since it is a direct report from a government body. Therefore, we know that this information is accurate and reliable. It was not peer reviewed, however it is an official report so we can assume it is accurate. It might not be very current, but it is recent enough to serve as a definition of what we can expect from more current laws, which would be very similar to this.