# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
February 27, 1949

Tragedy and the Common Man
By ARTHUR MILLER
n this age few tragedies are written. It has often been held that the lack is due to a paucity of heroes among us, or else that modern man has had the blood drawn out of his organs of belief by the skepticism of science, and the heroic attack on life cannot feed on an attitude of reserve and circumspection. For one reason or another, we are often held to be below tragedy-or tragedy above us. The inevitable conclusion is, of course, that the tragic mode is archaic, fit only for the very highly placed, the kings or the kingly, and where this admission is not made in so many words it is most often implied.
I believe that the common man is as apt a subject for tragedy in its highest sense as kings were. On the face of it this ought to be obvious in the light of modern psychiatry, which bases its analysis upon classific formulations, such as Oedipus and Orestes complexes, for instances, which were enacted by royal beings, but which apply to everyone in similar emotional situations.

More simply, when the question of tragedy in art is not at issue, we never hesitate to attribute to the well-placed and the exalted the very same mental processes as the lowly. And finally, if the exaltation of tragic action were truly a property of the high-bred character alone, it is inconceivable that the mass of mankind should cherish tragedy above all other forms, let alone be capable of understanding it.

As a general rule, to which there may be exceptions unknown to me, I think the tragic feeling is evoked in us when we are in the presence of a character who is ready to lay down his life, if need be, to secure one thing-his sense of personal dignity. From Orestes to Hamlet, Medea to Macbeth, the underlying struggle is that of the individual attempting to gain his "rightful" position in his society.

Sometimes he is one who has been displaced from it, sometimes one who seeks t attain it for the first time, but the fateful wound from which the inevitable events spiral is the wound of indignity and its dominant force is indignation. Tragedy, then, is the consequence of a man's total compulsion to evaluate himself justly.

In the sense of having been initiated by the hero himself, the tale always reveals what has been called his "tragic flaw," a failing that is not peculiar to grand or elevated characters. Nor is it necessarily a weakness. The flaw, or crack in the characters, is really nothing-and need be nothing, but his inherent unwillingness to remain passive in the face of what he conceives to be a challenge to his dignity, his image of his rightful status. Only the passive, only those who accept their lot without active retaliation, are "flawless." Most of us are in that category.

But there are among us today, as there always have been, those who act against the scheme of things that degrades them, and in the process of action everything we have accepted out of fear of insensitivity or ignorance is shaken before us and examined, and from this total onslaught by an individual against the seemingly stable cosmos surrounding us-from this total examination of the "unchangeable" environment-comes the terror and the fear that is classically associated with tragedy. More important, from this total questioning of what has previously been unquestioned, we learn. And such a process is not beyond the common man. In revolutions around the world, these past thirty years, he has demonstrated again and again this inner dynamic of all tragedy.

Insistence upon the rank of the tragic hero, or the so-called nobility of his character, is really but a clinging to the outward forms of tragedy. If rank or nobility of character was indispensable, then it would follow that the problems of those with rank were the particular problems of tragedy. But surely the right of one monarch to capture the domain from another no longer raises our passions, nor are our concepts of justice what they were to the mind of an Elizabethan king.

The quality in such plays that does shake us, however, derives from the underlying fear of being displaced, the disaster inherent in being torn away from our chosen image of what and who we are in this world. Among us today this fear is strong, and perhaps stronger, than it ever was. In fact, it is the common man who knows this fear best.

Now, if it is true that tragedy is the consequence of a man's total compulsion to evaluate himself justly, his destruction in the attempt posits a wrong or an evil in his environment. And this is precisely the morality of tragedy and its lesson. The discovery of the moral law, which is what the enlightenment of tragedy consists of, is not the discovery of some abstract or metaphysical quantity.

The tragic right is a condition of life, a condition in which the human personality is able to flower and realize itself. The wrong is the condition which suppresses man, perverts the flowing out of his love and creative instinct. Tragedy enlightens-and it must, in that it points the heroic finger at the enemy of man's freedom. The thrust for freedom is the quality in tragedy which exalts. The revolutionary questioning of the stable environment is what terrifies. In no way is the common man debarred from such thoughts or such actions.

Seen in this light, our lack of tragedy may be partially accounted for by the turn which modern literature has taken toward the purely psychiatric view of life, or the purely sociological. If all our miseries, our indignities, are born and bred within our minds, then all action, let alone the heroic action, is obviously impossible.

And if society alone is responsible for the cramping of our lives, then the protagonist must needs be so pure and faultless as to force us to deny his validity as a character. From neither of these views can tragedy derive, simply because neither represents a balanced concept of life. Above all else, tragedy requires the finest appreciation by the writer of cause and effect.

No tragedy can therefore come about when its author fears to question absolutely everything, when he regards any institution, habit or custom as being either everlasting, immutable or inevitable. In the tragic view the need of man to wholly realize himself is the only fixed star, and whatever it is that hedges his nature and lowers it is ripe for attack and examination. Which is not to say that tragedy must preach revolution.

The Greeks could probe the very heavenly origin of their ways and return to confirm the rightness of laws. And Job could face God in anger, demanding his right and end in submission. But for a moment everything is in suspension, nothing is accepted, and in this sketching and tearing apart of the cosmos, in the very action of so doing, the character gains "size," the tragic stature which is spuriously attached to the royal or the high born in our minds. The commonest of men may take on that stature to the extent of his willingness to throw all he has into the contest, the battle to secure his rightful place in the world.

There is a misconception of tragedy with which I have been struck in review after review, and in many conversations with writers and readers alike. It is the idea that tragedy is of necessity allied to pessimism. Even the dictionary says nothing more about the word than that it means a story with a sad or unhappy ending. This impression is so firmly fixed that I almost hesitate to claim that in truth tragedy implies more optimism in its author than does comedy, and that its final result ought to be the reinforcement of the onlooker's brightest opinions of the human animal.

For, if it is true to say that in essence the tragic hero is intent upon claiming his whole due as a personality, and if this struggle must be total and without reservation, then it automatically demonstrates the indestructible will of man to achieve his humanity.

The possibility of victory must be there in tragedy. Where pathos rules, where pathos is finally derived, a character has fought a battle he could not possibly have won. The pathetic is achieved when the protagonist is, by virtue of his witlessness, his insensitivity, or the very air he gives off, incapable of grappling with a much superior force.

Pathos truly is the mode for the pessimist. But tragedy requires a nicer balance between what is possible and what is impossible. And it is curious, although edifying, that the plays we revere, century after century, are the tragedies. In them, and in them alone, lies the belief-optimistic, if you will, in the perfectibility of man.

It is time, I think, that we who are without kings, took up this bright thread of our history and followed it to the only place it can possibly lead in our time-the heart and spirit of the average man.

Return to the Books Home Page

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
February 27, 1949 Tragedy and the Common ManBy ARTHUR MILLER n this age few tragedies are written. It has often been held that the lack is due to a paucity of heroes among us, or else that modern man has had the blood drawn out of his organs of belief by the skepticism of science, and the heroic attack on life cannot feed on an attitude of reserve and circumspection.

# data[].attributes.body
This relates to tragic heroes because social justice as a whole is a controversial topic because of economic struggles and long-standing social barriers, but warriors for social justice continue to fight, showing the indestructible will of man to fight not only for himself but for his brothers and friends.

# data[].attributes.headline
Lecciso, Franklin: Tragic Hero of Polar Exploration

# data[].attributes.subject
Lecciso, Franklin: Tragic Hero of Polar Exploration

# data[].attributes.body
The conflicting legacy of one of the most famous Britsh explorers who discovered the North-West passage, but also faced hardship and failure as well as accusations of cannibalism.

# data[].attributes.headline
Stone: Muslim Kids Specifically Targeted and Bullied

# data[].attributes.subject
Stone: Muslim Kids Specifically Targeted and Bullied

# data[].attributes.headline
Claiming a criminal is "mentally ill", in order to shift blame from the effects of society.

# data[].attributes.subject
Claiming a criminal is "mentally ill", in order to shift blame from the effects of society.

# data[].attributes.body
James

# data[].attributes.headline
Modern Day "Witch Hunts" against Muslims in America

# data[].attributes.subject
Modern Day "Witch Hunts" against Muslims in America

# data[].attributes.headline
Instincts lead man to open fire/Matuszynski

# data[].attributes.subject
Instincts lead man to open fire/Matuszynski

# data[].attributes.body
Three men who attacked the Turkish Embassy last year were following "the normal instinct of self-preservation" when they shot Pinkerton security guard Claude Brunelle, defence lawyer Jerome Choquette said yesterday.

In his closing address to an Ontario Supreme Court jury, Mr. Choquette said the three men were "patriots and idealists" who seized the embassy only to publicize the suffering of Armenians at the hands of the Turkish government early in the century.

The men were surprised, however, to find a security guard on duty, Mr. Choquette said. Mr. Brunelle may have fired the first shots and it was only human that the three would respond by opening fire, he said.

The outcome was "something close to or akin to" self-defence or an accident, Mr. Choquette said.

Ohannes Noubarian, Kevork Marachelian and Rafi Titizian have pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder.

Mr. Choquette, who did not call any defence witnesses at the three- week trial, argued repeatedly in his address that the accused did not intend to kill anyone when they stormed the embassy on March 12, 1985.

Crown prosecutor Andrejs Berzins told the jury, however, that the men were so heavily armed it was clear they were planning to seize the embassy by force and kill anyone who stood in their way.

Globe & Mail (Toronto, Canada), October 30, 1986From Opposing Viewpoints in Context

Listen

Byline: ALISON HARE

Three men who attacked the Turkish Embassy last year were following "the normal instinct of self-preservation" when they shot Pinkerton security guard Claude Brunelle, defence lawyer Jerome Choquette said yesterday.

In his closing address to an Ontario Supreme Court jury, Mr. Choquette said the three men were "patriots and idealists" who seized the embassy only to publicize the suffering of Armenians at the hands of the Turkish government early in the century.

The men were surprised, however, to find a security guard on duty, Mr. Choquette said. Mr. Brunelle may have fired the first shots and it was only human that the three would respond by opening fire, he said.

The outcome was "something close to or akin to" self-defence or an accident, Mr. Choquette said.

Ohannes Noubarian, Kevork Marachelian and Rafi Titizian have pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder.

Mr. Choquette, who did not call any defence witnesses at the three- week trial, argued repeatedly in his address that the accused did not intend to kill anyone when they stormed the embassy on March 12, 1985.

Crown prosecutor Andrejs Berzins told the jury, however, that the men were so heavily armed it was clear they were planning to seize the embassy by force and kill anyone who stood in their way.

# data[].attributes.body
"The Sacrificial Lamb" by Josefa de Ayala

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Contents

1. First Red Scare: 1917-1920

2. Cold War Concerns About Communism

3. Joseph McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee

4. J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI

5. Hysteria and Growing Conservatism

6. Red Scare Impact

The Red Scare was hysteria over the perceived threat posed by Communists in the U.S. during the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States, which intensified in the late 1940s and early 1950s. (Communists were often referred to as "Reds" for their allegiance to the red Soviet flag.) The Red Scare led to a range of actions that had a profound and enduring effect on U.S. government and society. Federal employees were analyzed to determine whether they were sufficiently loyal to the government, and the House Un-American Activities Committee, as well as U.S. Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, investigated allegations of subversive elements in the government and the Hollywood film industry. The climate of fear and repression linked to the Red Scare finally began to ease by the late 1950s.

First Red Scare: 1917-1920

In the United States, labor strikes were on the rise, and the press sensationalized them as being caused by immigrants bent on bringing down the American way of life. The Sedition Act of 1918 targeted people who criticized the government, monitoring radicals and labor union leaders with the threat of deportation.

The fear turned to violence with the 1919 anarchist bombings, a series of bombs targeting law enforcement and government officials. Bombs went off in a wide number of cities including Boston, Cleveland, Philadelphia, D.C., and New York City.

The first Red Scare climaxed in 1919 and 1920, when United States Attorney General Alexander Mitchell Palmer ordered the Palmer raids, a series of violent law-enforcement raids targeting leftist radicals and anarchists. They kicked off a period of unrest that became known as the "Red Summer."

Cold War Concerns About Communism

Did you know? FBI director J. Edgar Hoover was quick to equate any kind of protest with communist subversion, including the civil rights demonstrations led by Martin Luther King Jr. Hoover labeled King a communist and covertly worked to intimidate and discredit the civil rights leader.

Joseph McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee

J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI

The information obtained by the FBI proved essential in high-profile legal cases, including the 1949 conviction of 12 prominent leaders of the American Communist Party on charges that they had advocated the overthrow of the government. Moreover, Hoover's agents helped build the case against Julius Rosenberg (1918-53) and his wife, Ethel Rosenberg (1915-53), who were convicted of espionage in 1951. The Rosenbergs were executed two years later.

Hysteria and Growing Conservatism

Public concerns about communism were heightened by international events. In 1949, the Soviet Union successfully tested a nuclear bomb and communist forces led by Mao Zedong (1893-1976) took control of China. The following year saw the start of the Korean War (1950-53), which engaged U.S. troops in combat against the communist-supported forces of North Korea. The advances of communism around the world convinced many U.S. citizens that there was a real danger of "Reds" taking over their own country. Figures such as McCarthy and Hoover fanned the flames of fear by wildly exaggerating that possibility.

As the Red Scare intensified, its political climate turned increasingly conservative. Elected officials from both major parties sought to portray themselves as staunch anticommunists, and few people dared to criticize the questionable tactics used to persecute suspected radicals. Membership in leftist groups dropped as it became clear that such associations could lead to serious consequences, and dissenting voices from the left side of the political spectrum fell silent on a range of important issues. In judicial affairs, for example, support for free speech and other civil liberties eroded significantly. This trend was symbolized by the 1951 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Dennis v. United States, which said that the free-speech rights of accused Communists could be restricted because their actions presented a clear and present danger to the government.

Red Scare Impact

Americans also felt the effects of the Red Scare on a personal level, and thousands of alleged communist sympathizers saw their lives disrupted. They were hounded by law enforcement, alienated from friends and family and fired from their jobs. While a small number of the accused may have been aspiring revolutionaries, most others were the victims of false allegations or had done nothing more than exercise their democratic right to join a political party.

Though the climate of fear and repression began to ease in the late 1950s, the Red Scare has continued to influence political debate in the decades since. It is often cited as an example of how unfounded fears can compromise civil liberties.
Access hundreds of hours of historical video, commercial free, with HISTORY Vault. Start your free trial today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
First Red Scare: 1917-1920 Cold War Concerns About Communism Joseph McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI Hysteria and Growing Conservatism Red Scare Impact The Red Scare was hysteria over the perceived threat posed by Communists in the U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
Modern Day Witch Hunt on the "Outsiders" of the U.S- Confusion and fear being created in our nation.

# data[].attributes.headline
DeLucci Mass Hysteria Hits Okongo School

# data[].attributes.subject
DeLucci Mass Hysteria Hits Okongo School

# data[].attributes.body
An out break had started occurring within girls who had suddenly been put into a mental condition in relation to the Crucible where they had stopped talking within a strange language nobody was able to understand.

# data[].attributes.body
To which point is a real allegation used for personal gain

# data[].attributes.body
This article shows people's denial against things that are difficult to understand, similar to the witch hunt, when people didn't understand what was happening and made rash decisions to hide their fear.

# data[].attributes.headline
Johansen I'm Confessin' That I Killed You

# data[].attributes.subject
Johansen I'm Confessin' That I Killed You

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses the tragic hero and gives examples. It talks about how a tragic hero is neither completely good nor completely evil.

# data[].attributes.headline
Phillips - Daycare couple imprisoned for "Satanic Rituals" with children

# data[].attributes.subject
Phillips - Daycare couple imprisoned for "Satanic Rituals" with children

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Falsely accused of satanic horrors, a couple spent 21 years in prison

# data[].attributes.body
Scapegoat
It is a natural instinct to care for yourself
before others. To hear things you want, to see things
you want, and to even believe the things you want

What does that make someone who cares for you
before himself. To listen to your problems, to see your pain, and
to believe the lies and exaggerations you tell

When he has a problem, why do you run?
Why do you shy from the person who cares for you?
Why is it, when his demons appear, you are the one watching him burn?
Why must he brave this burden alone, to wither in your ashes?

What does that make him?
A slave?
A mindless creature?
A soulless shield?
A Scapegoat, nothing more.

# data[].attributes.headline
Waybright - Self Sacrifice; Chris Madden  

# data[].attributes.subject
Waybright - Self Sacrifice; Chris Madden  

# data[].attributes.headline
Group loyalty vs. individual conscience~ Yang

# data[].attributes.subject
Group loyalty vs. individual conscience~ Yang

# data[].attributes.headline
Trump's Similarity to Joe McCarthy - Uhland

# data[].attributes.subject
Trump's Similarity to Joe McCarthy - Uhland

# data[].attributes.body
The rights of individuals vs. group sentiment

# data[].attributes.body
Joseph E. Baker 1892 (https://www.legendsofamerica.com/ma-salemwitchcraft.html )

# data[].attributes.body
The natural tendency of society to blindly lead to a scapegoat. Photo by  Hartwig HDK, called the Scapegoat at Work.

# data[].attributes.headline
Hill- Denial of Truth and Climate Change

# data[].attributes.subject
Hill- Denial of Truth and Climate Change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The triumph of Western science led most of my professors to believe that progress was inevitable. While the bargain between science and political culture was at times challenged - the nuclear power debate of the 1970s, for example - the battles were fought using scientific evidence. Manufacturing doubt remained firmly off-limits.

Today, however, it is politically effective, and socially acceptable, to deny scientific fact. Narrowly defined, "creationism" was a minor current in American thinking for much of the 20th century. But in the years since I was a student, a well-funded effort has skillfully rebranded that ideology as "creation science" and pushed it into classrooms across the country. Though transparently unscientific, denying evolution has become a litmus test for some conservative politicians, even at the highest levels.

Meanwhile, climate deniers, taking pages from the creationists' PR playbook, have manufactured doubt about fundamental issues in climate science that were decided scientifically decades ago. And anti-vaccine campaigners brandish a few long-discredited studies to make unproven claims about links between autism and vaccination.

The list goes on. North Carolina has banned state planners from using climate data in their projections of future sea levels. So many Oregon parents have refused vaccination that the state is revising its school entry policies. And all of this is happening in a culture that is less engaged with science and technology as intellectual pursuits than at any point I can remember.

Thus, even as our day-to-day experiences have become dependent on technological progress, many of our leaders have abandoned the postwar bargain in favor of what the scientist Michael Mann calls the " scientization of politics."

What do I tell my students? From one end of their educational trajectory to the other, our society told these kids science was important. How confusing is it for them now, when scientists receive death threats for simply doing honest research on our planet's climate history?

Americans always expected their children to face a brighter economic future, and we scientists expected our students to inherit a world where science was embraced by an ever-larger fraction of the population. This never implied turning science into a religion or demanding slavish acceptance of this year's hot research trends. We face many daunting challenges as a society, and they won't all be solved with more science and math education. But what has been lost is an understanding that science's open-ended, evidence-based processes - rather than just its results - are essential to meeting those challenges.

My professors' generation could respond to silliness like creationism with head-scratching bemusement. My students cannot afford that luxury. Instead they must become fierce champions of science in the marketplace of ideas.

During my undergraduate studies I was shocked at the low opinion some of my professors had of the astronomer Carl Sagan. For me his efforts to popularize science were an inspiration, but for them such "outreach" was a diversion. That view makes no sense today.

The enthusiasm and generous spirit that Mr. Sagan used to advocate for science now must inspire all of us. There are science Twitter feeds and blogs to run, citywide science festivals and high school science fairs that need input. For the civic-minded nonscientists there are school board curriculum meetings and long-term climate response plans that cry out for the participation of informed citizens. And for every parent and grandparent there is the opportunity to make a few more trips to the science museum with your children.

Behind the giant particle accelerators and space observatories, science is a way of behaving in the world. It is, simply put, a tradition. And as we know from history's darkest moments, even the most enlightened traditions can be broken and lost. Perhaps that is the most important lesson all lifelong students of science must learn now.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The triumph of Western science led most of my professors to believe that progress was inevitable. While the bargain between science and political culture was at times challenged - the nuclear power debate of the 1970s, for example - the battles were fought using scientific evidence. Manufacturing doubt remained firmly off-limits.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New Year's Fortune-Telling | The Art Institute of Chicago

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Stencil 1825 x 801 mm Hitler, overcome with fear, Did fortune-telling at the New Year. He sits down, mumbles "Forty-Five, What will it mean for me?" He melted wax on the platter. A shadow was cast upon the wall. "What is it? What is it? Oh! A noose! For me?"

# data[].attributes.body
Scapegoats are the denial of truth

# data[].attributes.body
'Conflicts in Society' by Hassan Jetou

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Semage's different strokes for Oman art lovers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
sundaytimes.lk delivers the latest breaking news and information on the latest top stories, picture gallery, business, situtation report and more. sundaytimes.lk provides special video, udio, photo and galleries

# data[].attributes.body
Moral Glass

Our moral glass
Breaks easily
Like a feral beast
With a china mask

# data[].attributes.body
Young Con Man as Tragic Hero

# data[].attributes.body
http://0-ic.galegroup.com.sable.jefferson.lib.co.us/ic/ovic/MagazinesDetailsPage/MagazinesDetailsWindow?disableHighlighting=false&displayGroupName=Magazines&currPage=&scanId=&query=&docIndex=&source=&prodId=OVIC&search_within_results=&p=OVIC%3AGIC&mode=view&catId=&u=lsc&limiter=&display-query=&displayGroups=&contentModules=&action=e&sortBy=&documentId=GALE%7CA260060241&windowstate=normal&activityType=BasicSearch&failOverType=&commentary=

# data[].attributes.headline
Martin- Pew research and Tribune News Service- graphic about religious freedom in literature

# data[].attributes.subject
Martin- Pew research and Tribune News Service- graphic about religious freedom in literature

# data[].attributes.body
This article shows how misunderstanding of a population (LGBTQ+ in this case) can cause isolation and unjust treatment, giving the same flow as a witch hunt.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If you have not yet created a PIN, please enter your library card number and click Log In.

# data[].attributes.body
Drawing by

Honoré Daumier

# data[].attributes.body
http://0-ic.galegroup.com.sable.jefferson.lib.co.us/ic/scic/NewsDetailsPage/NewsDetailsWindow?disableHighlighting=false&displayGroupName=News&currPage=&scanId=&query=&docIndex=&source=&prodId=SCIC&search_within_results=&p=SCIC&mode=view&catId=&u=lsc&limiter=&display-query=&displayGroups=&contentModules=&action=e&sortBy=&documentId=GALE%7CA498274759&windowstate=normal&activityType=BasicSearch&failOverType=&commentary=

# data[].attributes.body
Denial of Truth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For decades now, gun control has triggered (no pun intended) intense bipartisan debate between American liberals and conservatives. With liberals typically pushing for stricter gun laws and conservatives quick to fervidly defend Second Amendment rights, gun control is considered one of the most remarkably divisive political matters in the United States today. But what does it really mean, and why is it such a sore topic?
What does "gun control" mean?
To begin with, "gun control" is a general term that refers to governmental restrictions placed on the manufacture, sale, and possession of firearms. Such restrictions may address questions like what types of rifles can be sold or purchased, who can sell or purchase them, and how a dealer should vet a buyer, how transactions are reported to the government and under what circumstances, and where and how owners can store their firearms.
How does the United States regulate guns?
Federal law forbids the ownership of a firearm by a convicted criminal, a person with a history of mental illness, a drug addict, an undocumented immigrant, a veteran dishonorably discharged from the military, or any person with a court order keeping them away from an ex-partner or ex-partner's children. Dealers are obligated to conduct background checks to determine whether a potential buyer meets the required legal criteria.

Gun control laws exist more intensively at the state level. Most states require a permit or license to carry a concealed firearm, and do not require a permit for legal gun owners to carry their firearms in public.
How do Americans generally feel about gun control?
According to a poll conducted by the Pew Research Center in August 2015, 50 percent of American respondents believed the U.S. should focus more heavily on restricting gun ownership, while 47 percent claimed it is more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns. Unsurprisingly, this nearly-equal divide is mimicked in real life U.S. politics.

The same poll found that 79 percent of Americans agree with developing restrictions to prevent citizens with a history of mental illness from purchasing guns, 70 percent support the establishment of a federal database to track all gun sales, and 57 percent support completely banning assault rifles. Of that initial 79 percent, 81 percent of respondents were Republicans and 79 percent Democrats. However, only 55 percent of Republicans favored the creation of a federal database compared with 85 percent of Democrats; and only 48 percent of Republican respondents supported banning assault-style weapons as opposed to 70 percent of Democrats.
What sparks this debate?
A report conducted by the Congressional Research Service found that roughly two-thirds of all mass murders in the U.S. are committed using firearms. At least 317 mass shootings, defined by the FBI as "a multiple homicide incident in which four or more victims are murdered with firearms, within one event, and in one or more locations in close proximity," have been committed in the U.S. from 1999-2013, injuring 441 victims and killing 1,554. The report also shows that both the prevalence and fatality rate of mass shootings rose sharply from 2007-2013.

Additionally, research by the University of Alabama Department of Criminal Justice found that even though the U.S. represents less than five percent of the global population, Americans accounted for 31 percent of global mass shooters from 1966 to 2012, more than any other country in the world.

With these statistics, liberals propose to ban firearms, claiming that mass shootings will quickly become easier to execute if citizens have an easy access to guns. In contrast, conservatives argue that guns can be used as a self-defense mechanism, and that mass shooters will be more discouraged if citizens have the means to defend themselves. In particular, they say that an armed citizen can stop a mass shooter. Social scientists insist there is no reliable research one way or another, proving that the debate sprouts purely from opinion.

Furthermore, different political groups interpret the Second Amendment of the Constitution, which reads, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Gun owners allege that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" is an individual right, while gun control advocates contend that it is a collective right of the people, through a militia. In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed the conservative argument in a 5-4 ruling, indicating that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own and operate a firearm for self-defense purposes, and thus rejecting the more liberal reasoning of a collective right.
What are the arguments for stricter gun control laws?
Gun control advocates are characteristically distrustful of America's gun laws. They favor banning assault rifles, and placing more restrictions on who should legally be able to purchase guns.

From their point of view, the system contains three rather evident loopholes due to how weakly it is enforced at the federal level. One is the so-called notorious "gun show loophole," which excuses dealers who do business at gun shows from having to conduct background checks on the people they sell to.

Another concern pertains to the permeable nature of the mental health requirements . The law explicitly bars firearm possession by a citizen declared a "mental defective" by some judicial authority. However, the issue presented with this constraint is that most people with a serious mental ailment never truly receive such arbitration, and those who do may petition to have the decision reversed.

Furthermore, a December 2015 New York Times article shows that most guns used in recent mass shootings, including firearms used in the San Bernardino attack, were obtained legally, even though at least eight gunmen had criminal histories or documented mental health issues.

"I believe it is necessary for our society to function with gun control," junior Isabel Oberlender said. "Even though countries can function without gun control, it doesn't mean that Americans should be held to the same standard because based on recent events, apparently we cannot."

A concern that has been voiced more recently, notably by President Barack Obama, is the fact that persons on the federal government's "No Fly List," a blacklist maintained by the Terrorist Screening Center naming suspected terrorists, are permitted to obtain guns legally.

"Congress should act to make sure no one on a no-fly list is able to buy a gun," President Barack Obama said during his Oval Office speech on December 6. "What could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semi-automatic weapon?"
What are the arguments for more sheltered gun rights?
Gun rights advocates form an incredible political lobby, led by the National Rifle Association (NRA), a social welfare organization. According to chief executive Wayne LaPierre, the NRA is backed by at least two million "active and interested" members.

Conservatives are typically against stricter gun control, and instead passionately support the right of American citizens to keep firearms for self defense, hunting, or simply because they can. However, some favor more restrictions to keep those with mental illnesses from gaining access to firearms.

"I'm against gun control, but I feel like there has to be more restrictions on purchasing guns," sophomore Damian Szlachta said. "In my opinion, there should be more tests and background checks than there already is."

In the wake of recent public mass shootings motivated by ISIS beliefs, Republican presidential candidates have voiced their preference to focus attention on strengthening national security as opposed to gun control regulations.

"When you look at Paris―you know, the toughest gun laws in the world, Paris―nobody had guns but the bad guys," Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said at a rally in Beaumont, Texas. "You can say what you want, but if...our people had guns...it would've been a much, much different situation."

Additionally, some conservatives are against the liberal initiative to ban No Fly List members from obtaining firearms. This is mainly due to how vague and loosely defined the criteria is to end up on such a terrorist watch list. According to a report published by The Intercept, "irrefutable evidence or concrete facts are not necessary" to articulate reasonable suspicion. The report also implies that the government may opt to add a citizen to the list if they are "nominated" by a credible source. Therefore, the list could not always be entirely accurate, and thus conservatives fear banning No Fly List affiliates from legally purchasing guns could infringe on the liberties of innocent Americans caught in a flawed system.
How does the modern debate impact public policy?
Senate lawmakers in early December rejected one bill proposing more background checks for online firearm purchases and gun show purchases, as well as another bill that would have made it more difficult for citizens on the No Fly List from purchasing guns. In response, President Obama plans to finalize an executive order that will expand background checks and close the gun show loophole. Realistically, the debate is likely to continue being as heated and closely divided as it is now.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For decades now, gun control has triggered (no pun intended) intense bipartisan debate between American liberals and conservatives. With liberals typically pushing for stricter gun laws and conservatives quick to fervidly defend Second Amendment rights, gun control is considered one of the most remarkably divisive political matters in the United States today.

# data[].attributes.body
The Persistence of Memory-- Salvador Dali

# data[].attributes.body
Add comment

more_vert
Plancarte: WItch
Plancarte: WItch
favorite_border
0


Add comment
Stone: Muslim Kids Specifically Targeted and Bullied
Stone: Muslim Kids Specifically Targeted and Bullied
 Download
Download
PDF document
padlet drive
favorite_border
0


Add comment
📎 Library Log in
Library Log in
Library Log in
If you have not yet created a PIN, please enter your library card number and click Log In.
jefferson
favorite_border
0


Add comment
Claiming a criminal is "mentally ill", in order to shift blame from the effects of society.
Claiming a criminal is "mentally ill", in order to shift blame from the effects of society.
James


favorite_border
0


Add comment
Modern Day "Witch Hunts" against Muslims in America
Modern Day "Witch Hunts" against Muslims in America
favorite_border
0


Add comment
Instincts lead man to open fire/Matuszynski
Instincts lead man to open fire/Matuszynski
  
Three men who attacked the Turkish Embassy last year were following "the normal instinct of self-preservation" when they shot Pinkerton security guard Claude Brunelle, defence lawyer Jerome Choquette said yesterday.

In his closing address to an Ontario Supreme Court jury, Mr. Choquette said the three men were "patriots and idealists" who seized the embassy only to publicize the suffering of Armenians at the hands of the Turkish government early in the century.

The men were surprised, however, to find a security guard on duty, Mr. Choquette said. Mr. Brunelle may have fired the first shots and it was only human that the three would respond by opening fire, he said.

The outcome was "something close to or akin to" self-defence or an accident, Mr. Choquette said.

Ohannes Noubarian, Kevork Marachelian and Rafi Titizian have pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder.

Mr. Choquette, who did not call any defence witnesses at the three- week trial, argued repeatedly in his address that the accused did not intend to kill anyone when they stormed the embassy on March 12, 1985.

Crown prosecutor Andrejs Berzins told the jury, however, that the men were so heavily armed it was clear they were planning to seize the embassy by force and kill anyone who stood in their way. 




 Globe & Mail (Toronto, Canada), October 30, 1986From Opposing Viewpoints in Context

 
Listen


Byline: ALISON HARE

Three men who attacked the Turkish Embassy last year were following "the normal instinct of self-preservation" when they shot Pinkerton security guard Claude Brunelle, defence lawyer Jerome Choquette said yesterday.

In his closing address to an Ontario Supreme Court jury, Mr. Choquette said the three men were "patriots and idealists" who seized the embassy only to publicize the suffering of Armenians at the hands of the Turkish government early in the century.

The men were surprised, however, to find a security guard on duty, Mr. Choquette said. Mr. Brunelle may have fired the first shots and it was only human that the three would respond by opening fire, he said.

The outcome was "something close to or akin to" self-defence or an accident, Mr. Choquette said.

Ohannes Noubarian, Kevork Marachelian and Rafi Titizian have pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder.

Mr. Choquette, who did not call any defence witnesses at the three- week trial, argued repeatedly in his address that the accused did not intend to kill anyone when they stormed the embassy on March 12, 1985.

Crown prosecutor Andrejs Berzins told the jury, however, that the men were so heavily armed it was clear they were planning to seize the embassy by force and kill anyone who stood in their way. 

favorite_border
0


Add comment
📎 Library Log in
Library Log in
Library Log in
If you have not yet created a PIN, please enter your library card number and click Log In.
jefferson
favorite_border
0


Add comment
Xenophobia
Xenophobia
favorite_border
0


Add comment
Trump's Travel Ban on Muslims -Bergman
Trump's Travel Ban on Muslims -Bergman
Modern Day Witch Hunt on the "Outsiders" of the U.S- Confusion and fear being created in our nation.


 Download
Download
PDF document
padlet drive
favorite_border
0


Add comment
Theander Harassment vs. Witch Hunt
Theander Harassment vs. Witch Hunt 
To which point is a real allegation used for personal gain 
 Download (1)
Download (1)
PDF document
padlet drive
favorite_border
0


Add comment
HagansThe Fight Against Discrimination
HagansThe Fight Against Discrimination
This article shows people's denial against things that are difficult to understand, similar to the witch hunt, when people didn't understand what was happening and made rash decisions to hide their fear. 
 Library Log in
Library Log in
jefferson
favorite_border
0


Add comment
Trump's Similarity to Joe McCarthy - Uhland
Trump's Similarity to Joe McCarthy - Uhland
 Download (1)
Download (1)
PDF document
padlet drive
favorite_border
0


Add comment
boyd xenophobia
boyd xenophobia
 Library Log in
Library Log in
jefferson
favorite_border
0


Add comment
Plancarte Muslim Witch Hunts in America
Plancarte Muslim Witch Hunts in America
http://0-ic.galegroup.com.sable.jefferson.lib.co.us/ic/ovic/MagazinesDetailsPage/MagazinesDetailsWindow?disableHighlighting=false&displayGroupName=Magazines&currPage=&scanId=&query=&docIndex=&source=&prodId=OVIC&search_within_results=&p=OVIC%3AGIC&mode=view&catId=&u=lsc&limiter=&display-query=&displayGroups=&contentModules=&action=e&sortBy=&documentId=GALE%7CA260060241&windowstate=normal&activityType=BasicSearch&failOverType=&commentary= 

favorite_border
0


Add comment
Heatwole
Heatwole
This article shows how misunderstanding of a population (LGBTQ+ in this case) can cause isolation and unjust treatment, giving the same flow as a witch hunt.
 Library Log in
Library Log in
If you have not yet created a PIN, please enter your library card number and click Log In.
jefferson
favorite_border
0


Add comment
Matuszynski- Marine Pitts
Matuszynski- Marine Pitts

favorite_border
0


Add comment
 