Trenton Dean
Prof. Heiniger
Comp 1103 (Honors)
11/11/14
Annotated Bibliography
Barry, Colleen L, Emma E. McGinty, Jon S. Vernick, and Daniel W. Webster. "After Newtown
Public Opinion on Gun Policy and Mental Illness." The New England Journal of
Medicine. 368.12 (2013). Print.
In this article written by four collaborative authors, the support for gun control is being
analyzed soon after a tragic shooting involving the mentally ill. In the month following
the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, two surveys were conducted in order to
gauge public opinion on the topic of gun control. Like many surveys used in other
articles, support for gun control was favored by the majority. Much of the data in this
article has been separated into “non-gun owner” and “gun owner” categories. Several
interesting observations were then made by the authors. One such useful observation was
that “non-gun owners” living with “gun owners” answered more similar to “non-gun
owners”.
The authors present an interesting article because of its timing in current events. This
information is more useful now than other surveys because the study is effected by the
shooting at Sandy Hook. Also, the realization mentioned previously is very important as
it offers a point of view suggesting that culture does not affect gun control opinions,
something that is contradictory to many other articles focused on similar topics. One item
this article lacks is a thorough reflection on the data, as new information is presented in
almost all of the paragraphs. The authors’ article is factual, timed correctly, and very
recent.
Braman, Donald, and Dan M. Kahan. "Overcoming the Fear of Guns, the Fear of Gun Control,
and the Fear of Cultural Politics: Constructing a Better Gun Debate." Emory Law
Journal. 55.4 (2006): 569-607. Print.
This article authored by Braman and Kahan explores the faults in the American gun
control debate and how to fix these issues. It argues that this debate is failing in two
ways, one being that the debate is off focus and the other being that Americans cannot
communicate effectively when disagreeing. The article claims that if both of these issues
were addressed, then the gun debate would not be nearly as prominent and controversial
as it is today. To fix the issue, the authors conclude that the debate needs not to be
focused on empirical data, rather than cultural views. Unfortunately, as the article later
points out, this is no easy task.
Unlike several of the other mentioned articles, this paper does not utilize surveys as a
primary source. Instead, the article is focused on showing exactly why surveys should not
be used as support in the gun control debate. The evidence utilized by this article is
cultural data, which creates a source that is not only useful and insightful but also
scholarly. The extremely thorough analysis in this article does make this article hard to
understand at times, but this is a tradeoff for the quality information received from such a
scholarly source. Braman and Kahan’s article is very detailed, informative, and wellresearched.
Cooke, CA, and JE Puddifoot. "Gun Culture and Symbolism Among U.k. and U.s. Women." The
Journal of Social Psychology. 140.4 (2000): 423-33. Print.
This article, written by two authors, explores the differences in gun control opinions
between UK and US women. This experiment to find the cultural differences was
executed exclusively with female college students from the UK and southern California.
The results showed that men were more likely to own guns in the US and UK than
women, but the difference was greater in the US. This information was then compared to
many other relevant statistics.
Like the previous two articles, this article is supported by facts. However, unlike those
articles, the focus is more comparative of facts rather that analytical. This creates a very
clear argument to support the idea that culture is what creates gun control opinions. This
article has also been well-researched, as it uses other researchers’ tests to compare data.
The authors of this article created a very well-researched, factual, and simple article.
Felson, Richard B, and Paul-Philippe Pare. "Gun Cultures or Honor Cultures? Explaining
Regional and Race Differences in Weapon Carrying.(report)." Social Forces. 88.3 (2010).
Print.
In this article written by two authors, the correlation between different demographics and
Honor Cultures is explored. Race, location, and gender are all explored and tested via
collected data on the percentage of people who carry a gun for personal protection. One
of the general trends is white southern males are more likely to carry a gun than northern
white men. This is similarly true for women as well. The article then begins to discuss
why this trend is true. Again, this boils down to the cultural differences of the north and
south.
This article utilizes facts and surveys as its primary source for explanation. Unlike the
others, this article more clearly sites the information and uses a variety of information
from differing dates. This creates extremely accurate data for the researchers to complete
their paper with. Also, the article correlates differing reasons very well, and brings to
light how culture effects gun control in many ways. This article written by two authors is
very clear, uses quality information and studies, and makes very useful correlations for a
research paper.
Fremling, Gertrud M, and John R. J. Lott. "The Surprising Finding That "cultural Worldviews"
Don't Explain People's Views on Gun Control.(response to Article by Dan M. Kahan and
Donald Braman in This Issue, P. 1291)." University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 151.4
(2003). Print.
In this response article written by Fremling and Lott, the opposite position is being taken
when compared to David Mustard’s response to Kahan and Braman’s article. In Fremling
and Lott’s response, the point being made is that empirical data is equally or more
influential on gun control opinions. The root of their argument is that the cultural beliefs
about gun control, that are supposedly the most “influential”, had to be made based on
empirical data at some point in the past. The authors then make several relevant
comparisons demonstrating the idea that data always creates a culture’s beliefs. The
paper moves on to discuss the evidence used in the original article and concludes by
questioning the original article’s authors, Kahan and Braman.
This article is very useful for further research. The reasoning for this is primarily because
it directly counters the original article and a response by another mentioned author. This
allows for the weak points in both arguments to show, leaving space for another opinion
on the issue. This article is very informative, however, it seems to lack actual data unlike
the original article it is responding to. This does not invalidate the article, but it does
show the weaknesses for this viewpoint. This response article written by Fremling and
Lott shows a unique perspective, is insightful and useful for comparison.
Kahan, Dan M. "The Gun Control Debate: a Culture-Theory Manifesto.(john Randolph Tucker
Lecture)." Washington and Lee Law Review. 60.1 (2003): 3-12. Print.
Kahan, in his article, discusses one of the main issues why gun control opinions are so
extremely divided. To explain this division, Kahan shows, using demographical statistics,
that gun control opinions are created by culture, not empirical data. Kahan even quoted a
Senator saying a very similar thing about gun control opinions and their origin. Later in
the article, the idea of gun control being based on culture’s “risk theory”. Kahan them
compares these “risks” with other risks effecting culture, to reinforce the truth that gun
control opinion stems from cultural differences.
The use of data and comparisons in Kahan’s article makes it very persuasive and
informative. This differing approach creates an article that is extremely useful for new
research. The information provided in this article is also well supported, much like the
previous article, as facts and sources are abundant. Another great feature of this article is
the Kahan’s unbiased opinion. He states this very clearly in the second paragraph, and it
is noticeable throughout the rest of the paper. Kahan’s article is very persuasive,
insightful with a new perspective, and descriptive.
Kleck, Gary. "Crime, Culture Conflict, and the Sources of Support for Gun Control: a Multilevel
Application of the General Social Surveys." The American Behavioral Scientist. 39.4
(1996): 387. Print.
In Gary Kleck’s article, he examines and discusses whether gun control support is
increased in citizens because of personal events or cultural beliefs. The author used
General Social Surveys (GSS) results to aid his analysis. Along with other information,
Kleck was able to collect opinions on gun control from varying cities across America.
Upon analyzing his results, the author found that elevated crime rates and prior
experience with violence and crime had very little to no effect on gun control opinions. In
some cases, Kleck found that violence actually increased citizen’s opposition to gun
control.
This article is primary based on surveys from varying cities across America. This creates
a very factual and concrete argument on the cause for gun control opinions.
Unfortunately, an article based almost entirely on national surveys from only a few select
cities is not applicable to all of society. Furthermore, this information may also be out of
date, since these surveys were taken in the 1990s. The author does however prove his
claims well with other articles and facts from the surveys. Kleck’s article is very factual,
straightforward and well-researched.
Kleck, G, M Gertz, and J Bratton. "Why Do People Support Gun Control?: Alternative
Explanations of Support for Handgun Bans." Journal of Criminal Justice. 37.5 (2009):
496-504. Print.
In this article written by three authors in collaboration, the reasoning behind support for
or against gun control is explored. Through research and many statistics, the authors
concluded that opinions on gun control are generally not caused from personal
experience, but rather cultural experience. The fact that gun crime statistics have changed
drastically over the past years is not reflected in the change of gun control opinions. The
authors stated that instead, the slow change in culture has a much more direct relationship
with gun control ideals.
As used in other articles, facts make up a large percentage of the support in this article.
However, this article offers its own unique perspective to explain why culture has a large
effect on public opinion on gun control. This article is very well supported and explained
in detail. An example of this is the phone survey the authors utilized. This article also
recognizes several hypothesis, and explains why or why not they are concise. The authors
of this article do a good job creating a very informative article that explains both sides of
the divided opinion.
Mustard, David B. "Culture Affects Our Beliefs About Firearms, but Data Are Also
Important.(response to Article by Dan M. Kahan and Donald Braman in This Issue, P.
1291)." University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 151.4 (2003). Print.
In David Mustard’s response to Kahan and Braman, he proves that people’s cultural
beliefs play a much larger effect on their gun control beliefs than that of actual data. He
concludes this through multiple tests of random citizens, where participants are asked to
what degree many gun related crimes are committed. To no surprise, the pre-existing
ideas that the participants had on the topic greatly affected the answers given. Even with
this conclusion, Mustard went on to conclude that data is still important as it is persuasive
for a percentage of the population.
Mustard’s conclusion on culture’s effect on gun control is most certainly a viable source.
By testing citizens with a few simple questions, Mustard was able to turn his hypothetical
conclusion into a legitimate claim. Adding to the article, Mustard also discussed how he
has seen culture affect gun control opinions during his speeches he presents. This article
provides information that is still applicable ten years later. Mustard’s response article is
well-researched, proven with data, and insightful.
Schuman, H, and S Presser. "The Gun Control Paradox." Contexts. 12.2 (2013): 68-69. Print.
In this article, written by Howard Schuman and Stanley Presser, the correlation between
opinion strength and extent of action for the controversial topic of gun control is
explored. Like several of the previously mentioned articles, surveys are used to become
aware of public opinions. The three conclusions that were drawn in the article from these
surveys were the publics’ opinion on gun control, how strong this opinion was, and to
what extent have they taken action towards enforcing their opinion. The authors found
that a majority of society supported gun restrictions. They also found that these
supporters of gun control were more strongly opinionated on this topic than the
opponents of gun control. However, the opponents of gun control were found to be taking
more action than the supporters. This was labeled the “Gun Control Paradox”.
Schuman and Presser did a very good job writing this short article. The article uses
quality data collected from surveys and compares this data to nationally recognized
surveys. Also, a strong analysis and conclusion of data is presented, making a very reader
friendly article great for expanding research. The data is extremely modern, with the
surveys being completed in the last few years. Schuman and Presser’s article is very
modern, insightful and useful for comparison and expansion of ideas.
Research Question: Is the gun control argument able to be settled, or will cultural differences
always play too large of a role in public gun control opinion for an agreement to be
reached?
I have neither given nor received unauthorized aid in completing this work, nor have I presented
someone else’s work as my own.
Trenton Dean