The Right To Bear Arms Essay, Research Paper
Article: “Bible offers remedy for nation?s reaping what it has sowed”, Rev. Jim Williams. Orlando Sentinel Tribune, Section: Osceola Sentinel, page 5; August 24, 1996
Researching the issue of the right to bear arms was somewhat difficult at first because I really did not know what to focus on. I did find this article, though, and it really interested me because of the different perspective it took on the issue. The article starts off with a quote from the Bible, so the reader knows right away that it has something to do with religion. It was written by Reverend Jim Williams and he took the stance that legislation to restrict gun ownership and possession is a clear violation of the Second Amendment and Article 1 of the Florida Constitution. He does not believe that gun laws or more money put into crime prevention will decrease the crime rate because it does not erase the sin in people?s hearts. In fact, he thinks that religious textbooks should be brought back to schools and that religious education is the only way out. He also believes that laws and punishments should be enforced. First degree murderers should face capital punishment regardless, because then this will stop repeat offenses. Punishment could also include paying back the victim or the victim?s family because since victims do not get a second chance, criminals should not either.
1. Reasoning:
A) Christianity has reference to principles which are right and wrong and is the foundation of morals and manners from which society was formed.
B) People waste too much time and money punishing crimes and little pains preventing them.
C) Guns used for trade-ins is not going to stop crime.
D) Legislation to restrict gun ownership and possession will not stop crime and is violation of the 2nd amendment.
E) Must stop crime at its source through education from the bible of implementing it back in education system.
F) Because by kicking god out of the education system, America is turning into a living hell.
G) There must be a bible centered law and justice where for ex. Capital crimes demand capital punishment.
H) Children should learn to obey the ten commandments.
I) Answer to crime does not lie in gun laws, more police or more money, but to instead permeate homes and courts with the laws of god.
2. The terms are used consistently. There are many quotes form verses in the bible which can be a little
obscure if you are not use to reading the bible, though. When there is a mention of certain people, he
does give a definition of who they are, such as creature = man , creation = mother earth. Also, when
he mentions the ten commandments, he names 3 of them that pertain to his views on crime. He also
mentions a lot of quotes from courts and their decisions. These are pretty straight forward and he
explains his opinion on the meaning of the decision afterwards.
3. The thesis of this story involves two ideas. The first one is that crime will not be reduced simply by gun trade-ins, gun laws or restrictions, metal detectors, curfews, more police or more money because the sin will stay in peoples hearts no matter what. The second idea is that the only way to eradicate all of the sin in the world is through education of the bible, beginning by implementing it back in the school system.
4. There are not very many facts from the present to substantiate the claim that the bible and religion will decrease crime and sinfulness in the world. He does try to recall that people founded this country on the basis of religion and it worked for 300 years before they took it out of the school system. He also says that since them, the country has gone to hell, He also does not have any evidence to support his claim that gun laws and other things are not working. Even though crime may have risen, there is no proof that I is because of these things. Overall, it is mostly just his opinion on how to cure society of these evils which is based towards church because he is a reverend.
5. The reasoning is too far out there. What I mean by this is that simply what this reverend is proposing is unrealistic. First of all, not everyone believes in god and second, not everyone believes in the same god. This puts too much emphasis on Christianity being the superior religion and the only way to end crime or evils in this world is to follow it. If a devout Christian were to read this, then they would agree that religious education is important and needs to be taught to our children to stop crime. He contradicts himself though because he says that gun restriction laws and registration requirements is a violation of the Second Amendment, but he still wants a decrease in crime. This cannot be achieved merely through religious education. People cannot be trusted with that much power sometimes to decide what is right and what is wrong. Education is important, though, but the education of effects of crime, not just the Bible.
6. Counter arguments to this issue really are not addressed. The examples he brings up mostly support his side or his reasoning of how bad things are becoming. He criticizes the courts and the entire justice system for allowing this to happen. Also, in a sense, he is criticizing the government for allowing America to “turn into hell”. He does not provide their arguments though to compare the two and see where the real answers may lie.
7. The whole piece is an appeal to a person?s sense of morality. A reader may begin to think about all the crime in this world and eventually agree that the only way to stop it is to teach the right kind of education in school, to teach morals and good judgment. He is assumed to be a man of knowledge who deserves respect because he is a reverend, a man of God, so this is why people would believe him. He states different cases from the 19th century which support Christianity and then more recent cases that have moved away from that Bible centered law of justice. All in all, it has a very slanted view of how solutions will come about and it just boils down to his opinion without any concrete facts to substantiate his claims.