Choose An Important Ethical Issue: Abortion Or Gun Control ✓ Solved
Chose Some Ethical Issue You Feel Is Important Abortion Gun
Chose some ethical issue you feel is important (abortion, gun control, climate change, eating meat, anything that can be considered a moral matter – if you are unsure, be sure to clear with your instructor). Present research on the situation being sure to clearly discuss both sides, as much as possible. Some conundrums will have much more weight on one side than the other such as climate change. Reiterate the primary theories contained in your moral compass from week 3 and then explain the position on this issue your compass promotes. Include a proper references/works cited slide (APA or MLA).
For example, say you want to address gender-neutral bathrooms in public buildings. First, present some research from sources promoting that they should exist and from sources promoting they should not. Then reiterate the components of your moral compass as stated in the week three paper. Note, your compass may have evolved and if so, work in the new components. Finally, state your position clearly (they should or should not exist) and how your compass justifies that position.
Keep in mind, please: proper PPTs have bullets on the slide that are explained in the notes section. If you intend to narrate the presentation be sure to include the transcript in the notes section. Keep the viewer in mind (teacher). While you might work hard on a 20 minute presentation, few faculty members have the time to watch or listen to it. Just like papers, clear citations must appear on the slide or in the notes to justify listing it as a reference.
Paper For Above Instructions
The ethical issue I have chosen to discuss is gun control, a highly contentious and multifaceted topic in today's society. The debate surrounding gun control has significant implications for public safety, individual rights, and societal values, which makes it a critical area of exploration.
Presentation of Research
Gun control revolves around the regulation of the sale, possession, and use of firearms. Proponents of gun control argue that stricter laws are necessary to reduce gun violence and enhance public safety. According to a study published by the American Journal of Public Health, states with stricter gun control laws have lower rates of gun-related deaths (Rothstein et al., 2019). Additionally, groups such as Everytown for Gun Safety advocate for more comprehensive background checks and restrictions on high-capacity magazines, asserting that these measures can prevent firearms from falling into the hands of those who may misuse them (Everytown Research, 2020).
Conversely, opponents of gun control advocate for Second Amendment rights and argue that owning a gun is a fundamental liberty essential for personal self-defense. The National Rifle Association (NRA) contends that increasing gun ownership among responsible citizens can deter crime, citing cases where armed individuals have protected themselves and others from attackers (NRA Institute for Legislative Action, 2021). Furthermore, opponents argue that focusing on mental health and improving law enforcement responses may be more effective solutions than imposing restrictive legislation on gun ownership.
Exploring Both Sides
The discourse on gun control often underscores a divide in values: the prioritization of public safety versus the safeguarding of individual freedoms. Advocates of stricter gun control often highlight the emotional toll that gun violence takes on families and communities, using powerful narratives and statistics to bolster their claims (Wintemute, 2019). In contrast, those against such regulations often point to the potential for government overreach and the rights of law-abiding citizens to protect themselves, emphasizing the potential backlash of disarming the population (Kates & Mauser, 2020).
Theories from My Moral Compass
Reflecting on my moral compass, I identify with a combination of utilitarianism and deontological ethics. Utilitarianism suggests that the best action is one that maximizes happiness or pleasure for the greatest number of people (Mill, 1863). In the context of gun control, this implies that laws restricting gun access may be justified if they result in fewer deaths and greater overall safety. Additionally, Kantian ethics, rooted in duty-based morality, posits that individuals have a moral responsibility to act in ways that respect the rights of others (Kant, 1785). This suggests that while individuals have the right to bear arms, this right must be balanced against the collective right to safety.
My moral compass promotes a nuanced position on this issue. I advocate for common-sense gun control measures that aim to reduce gun violence while respecting individuals' rights. This approach seeks to find a middle ground, acknowledging the legitimacy of both the concerns for public safety and the fundamental rights of gun owners.
Conclusion and Justification of Position
In conclusion, the discussion surrounding gun control is complex and multifaceted. While I recognize the importance of individual rights as enshrined in the Second Amendment, my moral compass, influenced by both utilitarian and deontological principles, leads me to the conclusion that we should implement sensible gun control measures. Such measures can enhance public safety without infringing on the rights of responsible gun owners. In promoting a world where both rights and safety coexist, we can strive for a balance that serves the best interests of society as a whole.
References
- Everytown Research. (2020). Everytown for Gun Safety.
- Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals.
- Kates, D. B., & Mauser, G. (2020). Would banning firearms save lives? A critical examination of the evidence. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy.
- Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism.
- NRA Institute for Legislative Action. (2021). National Rifle Association.
- Rothstein, M. A., et al. (2019). American Journal of Public Health, 109(1), 8-10.
- Wintemute, G. J. (2019). Firearm-related deaths: A public health issue. New England Journal of Medicine, 380(23), 2220-2223.