Required Resources Read/ Textbook: Chapter 12 Lesson Minimum of 5 scholarly sources (This includes the sources from the annotated bibliography. Additional sources may be included as appropriate.)In

PRINCIPLE OF ETHICS 9

Principle of Ethics

Annotated Bibliography

Chamberlain University

June 6, 2020

What are the personal and/or communal ethical factors that may be involved in determining the moral position of either side in that debate?

Communal ethical factors strive to uphold the moral responsibility in the community while eliminating the interference of the community processes. Guns in the wrong hands interfere with the security and the community level due to the increase in the incidences of crime. As such, the gun control laws regulate the ownership, sale, and manufacture of guns to ensure that the weapons do not get into the wrong hands. One ethical factor is the protection of women from abusers. This factor would apply to the proponents of gun control laws. Djamba and Kimuna (2015) observed violence against women as involving acts of threat and physical or sexual harm. Abusers that wrongfully have access to guns stand to cause more harm. As such, the gun controls would minimize the number of guns in the wrong hands. The second ethical factor is the enlightenment, which applies to the opponents to the gun controls. Gougheryty (2019) highlighted short guns as used for fun activities such as hunting birds and fast-moving animals. As such, people are holding the moral position of guns as used to exploring hobbies and other fun activities. As such, the gun control laws would infringe on their desire to have fun.

As part of the deontology theory, Kantian ethics hold that it is impossible to think about anything in the world that is good and has no limitations, except for goodwill. White (2011) highlighted the Kantian ethics as creating a firm foundation in character while developing particular duties and responsibilities. The author pointed out that Kantian ethics is empowering, inspiring, and humbling. While the gun control laws could be good, they have their limitations. The laws could be good if the government officials were entrusted with their enactment without fear, favor, or compromising their code of ethics. Also, the laws are good as long as the citizens, who are the reason for their development, strictly adhere to their requirements. These laws are also good if they are effective in the elimination of the guns that are in the wrong hands and are used in committing crimes.

Annotated Bibliography

Donohue, J. (2017). Laws Facilitating Gun Carrying and Homicide. American Journal of Public Health, 107(12): 1864-1865. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2017.304144

In the article, Donohue (2017) relied on the vital statistics to determine the estimate of the overall homicide the existing subcategories of crime. Through these statistics, the author strived to create a better understanding of the impact of the right to carry laws (RTL) on the rates of murder (p. 1864). The author highlighted the vital statistics as captivating as their collection is based on obligations, as opposed to the police data, provided on a voluntary basis. While relying on a table on variations in specifications and time period, the author outlined the RTL laws as increasing murders, especially the firearm and handgun murders. However, these laws seemed to have no impact on the non-gun murders (p. 1864). Donohue (2017) explored situations characterized by increased crime rates irrespective of the absence of the RTL laws. According to the author, the period of 1985 to 1992 was marked by increased crime rates in states that had no RTL law. The author associated the trend with the crack cocaine epidemic (p. 1864). Donohue (2017) noted that the RTL laws increased firearm homicide by 8.5%, with the handgun homicides standing at 16%. As such, while the RTL laws geared towards respecting the people’s rights, they endangered the lives of others in the process.

DeGrazia D. (2014). The Case of Moderate Gun Control. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 24(1): 1-25

DeGrazia (2014) explored the state of the appropriate gun policy while considering the legal and moral right of gun ownership. The author highlighted 2012 as a year characterized by incidences of gun violence in the United States. Despite the tons of mass shooting incidents, two stood out due to their tragic nature. The first was the incident orchestrated by James Holmes in Aurora, Colorado, during the premiere of the Batman movie (p. 1). With an AR-15 assault rifle in hand, Holmes aimlessly shot at the audience resulting in twelve people’s death and wounding 58 others. The second incidence involved Adam Lanza, who used an assault rifle to kill his mother, twenty elementary school children, school staff while also killing himself. The death of the children prompted a nationwide conversation of gun violence in the United States. DeGrazia outlined the citizen strictly following the laws in the United States have the legal and moral right to own a gun privately. According to the U.S. Supreme Court, the legal right to hold arms is enshrined in the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution (p. 2). The moral right to privately own a gun receives backing from the American’s right to self-defense. DeGrazia voiced that U.S. federal gun regulations’ weakness makes it possible for offenders and mentally unstable people to acquire firearms.

DeGrazia, D. (2016). Do Guns Make Us Free? Democracy and the Armed Society. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 26(3): E15-E19

DeGrazia (2016) sought to explore whether people enjoyed freedom in the wake of the gun culture. The author explored the notion held by the supporters of the gun culture by highlighting the views of other researchers. The first view was of Firmin DeBrabander, who noted that gun controls do not result in any loss of freedom. According to DeGrazia, DeBrabander argued that well-positioned gun rights and gun ownership do not protect people from tyranny while ensuring that people lead lives free from fear. In showing support for gun control as opposed to the ban on private gun ownership, DeGrazia highlighted the points following the order of chapter one up to chapter four. In chapter four, the author sought to determine whether guns threatened democracy by looking at the relationships between people. DeGrazia cited NRA official Wayne LaPierre who denoted gun rights as being the base for exercising other rights such as the freedom of speech and free assembly (E-17). In supporting the claims, DeBrabander argued the impossibility of the deterrence of the gun controls in the neighborhoods that record the highest crime cases. DeBrabander added that society needs to focus on other issues of drug addiction and poverty, which are the actual motivators of the high crime levels.

Newman, B. & Hartman, T. (2019). Mass Shootings and Public Support for Gun Control. British Journal of Political Science, 49(4): 1527-1553

Newman and Hartman (2019) explored mass public shootings in the United States and their effect on citizens’ opinions and public policy. The author dwelled on the 14th December 2012 incident where a youngster openly shot at 28 people at the Sandy Hook Elementary (p. 1527). Newman and Hartman stated eh conversation that occurred following on the incidence as touching on various topics, among them mental health. The author cited the then President Barrack Obama as noting the shooting incidence as linked to other series of similar events taking place across the country. Newman and Hartman discussed the gun legislation as a dominant issue in the American politics due to the received attention from the media and the interests that people had on the gun control laws due to the mass shootings. As opposed to limiting access to firearms, Newman and Hartman cited the National Rifle Association’s claims on the need for more laws. Newman and Hartman should avoid using the incidence of mass shootings as necessitating the need for gun control laws. Instead, the causes of mass shootings should be determined.

Jones, M. & Stone, G. (2015). The U.S. Gun-Control Paradox: Gun Buyer Response to Congressional Gun-Control Initiatives. Journal of Business & Economics Research¸13(4), 167. https://doi.org/10.19030/jber.v13i4.9449

Jones and Stone (2015) sought to determine how people reacted to the new gun control legislation passed during the Obama administration. Prior attempts to avoid the gun control laws during the first term of Obama’s administration saw a period characterized by increased gun sales and shortages of weapons. Jones and Stone noted the new legislation as bringing on board an unexpected reaction. While the legislation sought to limit the sale of guns to the consumers, the aftermath was the increase in the number of guns in the streets. Jones and Stone discussed the idea of opposition targeted on the legislation with the U.S. firearm industry ss vehemently opposing Obama’s administration (p. 167).

References

DeGrazia D. (2014). The Case of Moderate Gun Control. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 24(1): 1-25

DeGrazia, D. (2016). Do Guns Make us Free? Democracy and the Armed Society. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 26(3): E15-E19

Donohue, J. (2017). Laws Facilitating Gun Carrying and Homicide. American Journal of Public Health, 107(12): 1864-1865. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2017.304144

In Djamba, Y. K., & In Kimuna, S. R. (2015). Gender-based violence: Perspectives from Africa, the Middle East and India. Springer

Jones, M. & Stone, G. (2015). The U.S. Gun-Control Paradox: Gun Buyer Response to Congressional Gun-Control Initiatives. Journal of Business & Economics Research¸13(4), 167. https://doi.org/10.19030/jber.v13i4.9449

Martin, J. D. O. U. G. H. E. R. T. Y. (2019). Sporting Guns; Weapons, Skills And Techniques For Competitive Shooting Sports. S.L.: Amber Books Ltd

Newman, B. & Hartman, T. (2019). Mass Shootings and Public Support for Gun Control. British Journal of political Science, 49(4): 1527-1553

White, M. D. (2011). Kantian ethics and economics: Autonomy, dignity, and character. Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press