CorrectMyText    Users

 en ru de it fr es pt id uk tr

English language

The text to correct from user Naiiwa

THE AMERICAN GUN MADNESS Problemati­c: To what extent can we consider that the use of gun in America nowadays is mad? The Second Amendment declares: 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. This founding principle of American law and society seems nonsensial for a lot of countries where guns are almost unused, except by police. But with 357 millions arms in circulatio­n for only 317 millions of inhabitant­s in 2016 and a multiplica­tion of case of gun violence, could we still consider that this use of guns is normal? To what extent can we consider that the use of gun in America nowadays is mad? We will answer it, resting on 3 documents, the first one dealing with the history of gun in America and the law supervisin­g gun, the second one dealing with the mass shooting in school and then with the solution proposed since few years to this gun violence in school. My first document is composed by a cartoon entitled A Brief History of the USA and by a press article: Trayvon Martin: A victim of Florida's weak law? We would first talk about the cartoon. It's an extract from the movie Bowling for Columbine recounting the history of gun in America. I chose it because it concentrat­e on the importance of gun all along the american history, and it explains why it is so deep-rooted in their culture. Neverthele­ss, we must take account of the sarcastic side of the cartoon, which is brazenly against gun.
First, it shows that since the coming of the Pilgrims in the New World, the americans always felt the need to carry a gun because they were "afraid", as they say in it. Afraid of "savages", witches, slaves and then black people. And their solution was to carry a gun. Then, it point out some coincidenc­es as the NRA, created the same year as the KKK was declared illegal. "Of course, they had nothing to do with each other". Are they the same? This is what the cartoon imply, but we don't forget that it is sarcastic and certainly non objective. But during years, it was illegal for a black person to carry a gun so we can wonder. And finally, when segregatio­n became illegal, the whites "went out and bought a quarter of a billion guns". This is the final scene, where we see a family with a gun per member, in a gated community, shooting the postman. This scene is clearly here to denounce this mass using of guns, and the fairy tale form with "once upon a time" and "everyone lived happily ever after" may have been used to show that this situation seems normal for a lot in America, but is it really? This cartoon is linked with the press article about Trayvon Martin and the Florida's weak law, because if the first one is explaining the place of guns in America, the second one show an example of the consequenc­es it has brought. The press article is dated from 2012 and relate the murder of Trayvon Martin, a 17 years old black teenager, shot by George Zimmerman for no reason. Trayvon Martin was only walking in the street, wearing a sweat and a hoodie, and George Zimmerman found his behaviour guilty, that's why he shot him. George Zimmerman, who claimed self-defense, have been acquitted. Neverthele­ss, the journalist point out some disturbing elements. First, whereas George Zimmerman was carrying a concealed handgun, Trayvon Martin was only carrying a bag of candy. This opposition show that the situation was clearly unfair. Then, we learn that the shooter was allowed to carry a gun even though his agressive behaviour had been informed to the authoritie­s. This lead us to talk about Florida's weak law and particular­y the Stand Your Ground law, which establish a low threeshold to justify self-defense. But this can be find in many states: almost everybody can carry a gun and they are protected if they kill someone in the name of self-defense. That's why this can be considered as an example of gun madness in America. My second document is composed by an extract from the novel The Life Before Her Eyes and a film: Elephant. The Life Before Her Eyes is a novel by Laura Kasischke, and the extract takes place in the girl's room of an High School. There's 2 girls, identified as "one girl" and "the other". We can first see that the girls aren't named, as if that their identities doesn't matter. Then, we quickly understand that a shooter is coming: his name is Michael Patrick. Why does he have a name and the girls don't? It may be because he's the only one important because he have a gun, and the power to kill.
In this text, the author insist on the innocence of the two girls, comparing their hair with "gold and black silk" making like an "angel nest". They are compared to newborn. However, the author also convey an idea of death, opposed to this idea of youth and innocence. The pages of their anthology of litteratur­e are compared to "dead girl's dreams" and to "translucen­t skin". So we understand that death is roaming, it predict what will going on next, but it seems unfair because they are too young and innocent to die. Then, there is another opposition between the innocence of the girls and the cruaulty of the killer. Indeed, he "laugh" despite they "sob", and he even ask them which one should he kill. It's strenghen by the sweat stain he has on his shiny shirt because he shaved and the hard breath he has, what shows that he's excited to kill, he's sadistic. All of this shows th gun madness because innocents are killed, and the murderer take pleasure in it. The same idea is conveyed in the film by Gus Van Sant: Elephant, which was inspired by the tragedy of Columbine. To resume, the film is in two parts: first we follow all the characters in their routine, we see them walking through the endless hallways and then the calm and monotonous ryhtm is broke by the coming of two shooters, who kill all the characters we have followed. The killers are Alex, a bullied teenager, and his friend Eric. To my mind, the first death is full of symbol because it's Michelle, who is quite the harmless double of Alex. She was bullied too, so she was not responsibl­e of the uneasiness of Alex, but she is killed all the same. This show how this mass shooting is unfair, because everybody die, independen­tly of if they deserve it or not.
Actually, all the characters are quite symbolic. Elias, for example, who is a photograph­er, takes photos of everybody before the tragedy. In a way, he keeps their memory alive through this pictures. The three girls, them, are a cliche of gossiping girls, and their death is ironic because they are talking about death a few minutes before dying. In a general way, we can see that every character is talking about future, as if they couldn't imagine dying now because they are too young: it seems unfair, as in the novel. Both together shows the gun madness and the power of gun, because the teenagers are weak in front of it and young people are dying for nothing. Gun is obviously something dangerous but it seems normal for a lot to own one, as for Alex's parents. I will finish with my personal document, which illustrate the spiral of violence in the USA. It's a press article, dated from April 2016. It deals with a new measure taken in the country to protect children in case of mass shooting: arming teachers. In some states it exists since few years but it raise some questions, that some are expressed in the article. Is it the teacher's job? Could they fire, if we consider that shooting someone is hard even for a policeman? Some people retort that they are in the first line of defense and they can protect the students meanwhile the police come. The question I am asking is: is it really efficient to prevent these tragedies? And is it a solution to meet violence with violence? I don't think so. To conclude, this perfectly illustrate the american gun madness, with a rise of violence and a spread of violence. In America, everyone carry or can carry a gun, and there's now more arms in circulatio­n in the country than there's inhabitant­s. Is it still a normal using of guns? This leads to tragedies as school massive shooting, but they respond to it with more violence. Is there a limit?
Language: English   Language Skills: Native speaker, Proficiency

Login or register to correct this text!

You can correct this text if you set follow language skills of English in settings: Native speaker, Proficiency

Please correct texts in English:


Please help with translation:

English-Latin
English-Latin
English-Latin
English-Russian