Samuel+A.

Freedom of Religion By Samuel Aguilar Aaron Thetires and Clyde Nowndat were outside playing football in their local neighborhood park. Aaron, a catholic had always thought why there was so much discrimination against other religions. Clyde on the other hand was a Jehovah’s Witness member who didn’t care what others thought of him. He and his other religious members, including his family would go around town and knock on doors talking to people about their religion. Aaron asked “What have you and your members done in the past week?” “Why do you ask?” “I heard old man Ted down the block said he’d burn down your members’ truck." “That’s Absurd!” “Aren’t you afraid of what will happen”  “Nah, that man’s been crazy ever since he’s been in the war.”  “You sure, because he seemed serious, and word on the street is,” Aaron began to whisper, “He’s got a whole lot of lighter fluid”  Clyde boasted “Well he has no right to discriminate against my religion. You know it’s one of our rights." Aaron insisted, “Dude, just be careful tonight, you don’t know what that man is capable of.” “Alright but before I leave I’ll tell my cousin to carry his gun too”. That night Clyde had met up with his Religious members and spreded out throughout different parts of the city. He was in charge of Uptown, far from the old wicked man. He made stops to homes giving out pamphlets. He carried his cellphone to keep in contact with his other members. Then a call came in. It was John, one of his team mates. “Hey John what’s up” “Hurry the old man down the street is burning our truck!" Clyde ran down the hill as fast as he could, but it was too late for him. He could only see the shredded paper and molten steel frame of the truck. He was shocked.  The next day Reporter Anita Bath arrived at the scene. “According to eye witnesses, the old man refused to take the pamphlets from the followers. He had seen them leave some on his porch and that’s when he lashed out.”  Clyde didn’t go to school the next day because of what occurred. Aaron though of a good plan that might cheer his followers up. He wrote an article against Religious discrimination that he would leave outside of front yards. He told his Principal, Harrison Fire if he could also write it so that other school members could also read it. He agreed but counselors did not agree with it. They claimed that other students would get involved and it would be bad for their education. Aaron went on with his plan and wrote the article. After school he passed it out to the football team, the teachers and everyone in the neighborhood. The next day he arrived to school, he saw the counselors frustrated at him. “Why did you do it, you know this could go on your permanent record!” “I don’t care! I did it and I can write an article if I want to! Tell me, did it hurt anyone” “Yes” “Tell me who then!” The counselor lowered her voice. “That’s right. I could inform the public if I want to and there is nothing you can do to threaten me, to hurt me or to even scare me.” Aaron picked up his things. “Good Day to you.” Clyde came to school the next day looking for Aaron. “Hey Clyde! How’s it going?” Said Aaron.“Listen, word on the street is that the counselors have filled a police report against you. This is bad, real bad” “I’ll have to think about it first, what if they catch me with a bunch of these papers." “I don’t know, beats me.”  Aaron rode his bike home wondering how he would solve this situation. He looked at his garage door and there they were the pile of leftover articles.He thought to himself, "How am I going to evade the cops." He got the articles and folded them into tiny squares.  He called Clyde, “Hey Clyde I need you to stop by for a moment”  “Why? What’s the matter?”  “I’m going to need your help." That afternoon a man sweeping the sidewalk knocks on Aaron’s door. “Mom, no! Wait” "What? You don’t even know who it is.” “Aaron ran and hid behind the box filled with the articles." “Freeze! Nobody move undercover cops! We are here for an Aaron Thetires is that correct?” “Yeah” The cops took Aaron and cuffed him behind the cruiser. “Ma’am were here to find some articles.” "Why? What did they do” “According to his school counsel, they did not agree on his un declared distribution of these page long articles.”  “What? Aaron made no such articles. All he made were some pamphlets.”  The cops looked and found a pile of pamphlets sitting in Aaron’s garage. “Um sir this may sound embarrassing but, we couldn’t find any articles.” The squad commander let go of Aaron. Aaron walked towards Clyde.  He whispered, “We did it” The cops hopped in their cruiser.  “Sorry for the inconvenience Ma’am”  “No problem”  “Take care”  "You too” Aaron went inside and sat on the couch. Clyde asked “How did you do it?” Aaron replied “Thank the 4th amendment.”

Days passed and the counselors had to find a way to bust Aaron and Clyde for what they had done. They devised plans like backpack checks, but no sign of articles. They did a locker inspection, but still nothing. They were puzzled for their first time in their career as counselors. They then found a brilliant idea. It is suspected that Aaron wrote the article in his computer and printed them in the copy room. The counselors reunited to bust Aaron. “Hello everyone” said the Secretary “I have found the key to busting Aaron Thetires for his school crime. Tomorrow when he arrives at his first period class, Computer Technology, we will accuse him of the crime and find the file on the hard drive.” The counselors agreed and met up at the site the next day. Aaron walked in to the school and immediately felt he was being followed. He looked around but no one was there. He hears not a sound but that of the wind coming in from the window. He walked into the bathroom knowing that whoever was following him, couldn’t catch up with him anymore. He got to the floor and peered through the door. There they were a school officer and the counselors! He began to breathe hard, his heart pounding, and his mind racing. He saw the bathroom window but he could not reach it. He remembered he had a remote control car in his backpack. He had saved it for after school. He let it go and made it roll right under the cop. He looks down and saw the car. He looked at it in suspicion and that’s when Aaron bolted out. He ran for a door but it was blocked. He looked for an exit but they were also blocked. He saw the open window he had seen earlier and jumped out. He fell on the ground and ran for the park, where hopefully, he’d lose the cops. He had a great start but that’s when he saw a cop face him. He turned but the cop immediately tackled him to the ground. Aaron fell and faced the cop. He had been tried for Disturbing the Peace and for distributing false documents to the local neighborhood. He had been caught. The police had found the article on his computer and a backup on his flash drive. Aaron was processed and tried for the distribution that same day. The teachers looked on at him with heavy eyes as the even smaller children gave him the thousand eye stare. He arrived at the court and he had not known what he had done. Clyde was not charged with anything but he was still supporting Aaron for his courage. Aaron got locked up in a cell along with two other boys. He sat in the corner and said nothing. For three hours he sat and waited for his trial. He stood and went to court. The Judge said “You are here for the unregulated distribution of articles to your class mates“ “Your honor, may I speak” “Go ahead” “Thanks, your honor. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I am here today for informing my neighborhood and class mates about a crisis that is sweeping the nation, religious discrimination. Some take it as a joke, others take it seriously. The other day my friend nearly got killed, and I’m being tried for something I did to protect the other children?” The jury began to nod, while the counselors began to look in awe. “Hey counselors! How many kids did I hurt? How many kids did I injure?” The counselors said nothing. "Well I think we’ve made a decision” said the judge. “Aaron, you are free ” Aaron was let free and the next day he went to school. The principal greeted him in the door and handed him an award for his courage to go up in front of the Court. Clyde also thanked him for what he did. Aaron took a bow in front of his class mates and walked towards his classroom. When he walked towards his locker, one of the counselors turned and faced Aaron. “Aaron, I had expected you” He took a pocket gun out of his pocket and shot Aaron in the chest. Aaron flew across the hallway and closed his eyes.  He heard “Aaron! Aaron!”  “Huh”  "Aaron you fell asleep during the whole lecture about the Bill of Rights.” Said Clyde. “Wow, was I asleep?” “I know!” “Dude, promise me you won’t go on today’s religious reunion.” “Why?” “I had a vision and you don’t want to know.” “Well how does it start?” “It starts like this….. The End (Read the story over again to see where Aarons’ vision leads to)

Second Amendment Violation: Assault Rifle Ban (Should assault rifles be banned nationwide?) By Samuel Aguilar Biased Article #1: Source ( [] ) Against The Ban “Military-style semi-automatic firearms (so-called assault weapons) do not differ materially from non-military style semi-automatic firearms (one bullet is fired for each pull of the trigger) and are no more powerful than other semi-automatic weapons. Further, a bullet fired from a semi-automatic weapon is no more powerful than one of the same caliber fired from a corresponding non-semi-automatic handgun, rifle, or shotgun. In fact most assault weapons are less powerful than hunting rifles. For example, the AR-15 (a semi-automatic version of the U.S. military's rifle, M-16), is a .223 caliber rifle. Rifles of this caliber, when used for hunting, are generally used on small game rather than deer. A smaller caliber bullet is more likely to wound the animal (and allow it to escape and suffer a slow death) than the more powerful .24 to .30 caliber bullets normally used in deer hunting rifles (see this hunting rifle ammunition chart). Assault weapons are not the weapons of choice among drug dealers, gang members or criminals in general. Assault weapons are used in about one-fifth of one percent (.20%) of all violent crimes and about one percent in gun crimes. It is estimated that from one to seven percent of all homicides are committed with assault weapons (rifles of any type are involved in three to four percent of all homicides). However a higher percentage is used in police homicides, roughly ten percent. (There has been no consistent trend in this rate from 1978 through 1996.) Between 1992 and 1996 less than 4% of mass murders, committed with guns, involved assault weapons. (Our deadliest mass murders have either involved arson or bombs.) There are close to 4 million assault weapons in the U.S., which amounts to roughly 1.7% of the total gun stock. If assault weapons are so rarely used in crime, why all the hoopla when certain military-style-semi-automatic weapons were banned by the Crime Control Act of 1994? A Washington Post editorial (September 15, 1994) summed it up best: No one should have any illusions about what was accomplished (by the ban). Assault weapons play a part in only a small percentage of crime. **The provision is mainly symbolic; its virtue will be if it turns out to be, as hoped, a stepping stone to broader gun control**.

**Definitions ** A //genuine// assault weapon, as opposed to a legal definition, is a hand-held, selective fire weapon, which means it's capable of firing in either an automatic or a semiautomatic mode depending on the position of a selector switch. These kinds of weapons are heavily regulated by the National Firearms Act of 1934 and are further regulated in some states. (See machine guns.) However, current "assault weapon" legislation defines certain semi-automatic weapons as "assault weapons." A semi-automatic weapon is one that fires a round with each pull of the trigger, versus an automatic weapon which continues to shoot until the trigger is released or the ammunition supply is exhausted. These kinds of "assault weapons" are sometimes referred to as military-style semi-automatic weapons. An example of assault weapon legislation is the Federal 1994 Crime Bill. The bill in part outlaws new civilian manufacture of certain semi-automatic assault weapons. It also prohibits new civilian manufacture of "large capacity ammunition feeding devices" declared certain weapons as assault weapons, and states a semi-automatic //rifle// is an assault weapon if it can accept a detachable magazine and has two or more of the following: _ (For the Crime Bill's definition of assault shotguns and pistols, a list of assault weapons and further legal issues see [|Crime Bill FAQ].) [The 1994 Crime Bill expired on September 13, 2004. See [|Semiautomatic Assault Weapon (SAW) Ban QUESTIONS & ANSWERS] from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.] **Assault Weapons: The Weapons of Choice? ** The following summary of police statistical surveys is excerpted from Kopel, David B, [|//Rational Basis Analysis of "Assault Weapon" Prohibition//]. (Kopel's paper contains the citations for these surveys and lists a few more studies as well.)
 * A folding or telescoping stock
 * A pistol grip
 * <span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">A bayonet mount
 * <span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">A flash suppressor, or threads to attach one
 * <span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">A grenade launcher.
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">California //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. In 1990, "assault weapons" comprised **thirty-six** of the 963 firearms involved in homicide or aggravated assault and analyzed by police crime laboratories, according to a report prepared by the California Department of Justice, and based on data from police firearms laboratories throughout the state. The report concluded that "assault weapons play a **very small role** in assault and homicide firearm cases." Of the **1,979 guns** seized from California narcotics dealers in 1990, **fifty-eight were "assault weapons."**
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">Chicago //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. From 1985 through 1989, only one homicide was perpetrated with a military caliber rifle. Of the 17,144 guns seized by the Chicago police in 1989, 175 were "military style weapons."
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">Florida //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. Florida Department of Law Enforcement Uniform Crime Reports for 1989 indicate that rifles of all types accounted for 2.6% of the weapons used in Florida homicides. The Florida Assault Weapons Commission found that "assault weapons" were used in 17 of 7,500 gun crimes for the years 1986-1989.
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">Los Angeles //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. Of the more than 4,000 guns seized by police during one year, only about 3% were "assault weapons."
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">Maryland //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. In 1989-90, there was only one death involving a "semiautomatic assault rifle" in all twenty-four counties of the State of Maryland.
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">Massachusetts //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. Of 161 fatal shootings in Massachusetts in 1988, three involved "semiautomatic assault rifles." From 1985 to 1991, the guns were involved in 0.7% of all shootings.
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">Miami //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. The Miami police seized 18,702 firearms from January 1, 1989 to December 31, 1993. Of these, 3.13% were "assault weapons."
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">New Jersey //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. According to the Deputy Chief Joseph Constance of the Trenton New Jersey Police Department, in 1989, there was not a single murder involving any rifle, much less a "semiautomatic assault rifle," in the State of New Jersey. No person in New Jersey was killed with an "assault weapon" in 1988. Nevertheless, in 1990 the New Jersey legislature enacted an "assault weapon" ban that included low-power .22 rifles, and even BB guns. Based on the legislature's broad definition of "assault weapons," in 1991, such guns were used in five of 410 murders in New Jersey; in forty-seven of 22,728 armed robberies; and in twenty-three of 23,720 aggravated assaults committed in New Jersey.
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">New York City //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. Of 12,138 crime guns seized by New York City police in 1988, eighty were "assault-type" firearms.
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">New York State //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. Semiautomatic "assault rifles" were used in twenty of the 2,394 murders in New York State in 1992.
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">San Diego //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. Of the 3,000 firearms seized by the San Diego police in 1988-90, nine were "assault weapons" under the California definition.
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">San Francisco //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. Only 2.2% of the firearms confiscated in 1988 were military-style semiautomatics.
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">Virginia //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. Of the 1,171 weapons analyzed in state forensics laboratories in 1992, 3.3% were "assault weapons."
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">National statistics //<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. Less than four percent of all homicides in the United States involve any type of rifle. No more than .8% of homicides are perpetrated with rifles using military calibers. (And not all rifles using such calibers are usually considered "assault weapons.") Overall, the number of persons killed with rifles of any type in 1990 was lower than the number in any year in the 1980s.”

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">_ // ** Why this was biased ** ** “The main idea of the text was that assault rifles should not be banned in California because of the very few deaths caused by these weapons. This text was biased because it only included evidence supporting the cause against the ban. One support idea would be that the author only included factual evidence which stated that fewer deaths have been caused by an assault rifle, than a pistol or any other type of gun, (8 out 2000 deaths). The persuasive technique used was cardstacking in which he only included support for his side, and the edition of real life facts and statistics. This helped the reader understand and really sink in the idea of how assault rifles haven’t done much damage to society. “ **

<span style="color: windowtext; display: block; font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; font-style: normal; margin: 10pt 0in 0pt; text-align: center;">**In Favor of the Ban**
====<span style="color: windowtext; display: block; font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; font-style: normal; margin: 10pt 0in 0pt; text-align: center;">**Source:(http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Assault_weapons_ban_in_the_United_States)** ====

<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; margin: 10pt 0in 0pt;">**// Yes //**

 * **The Second Amendment applies to militia's, not private ownership.** "Since the Second Amendment right 'to keep and bear arms' applies only to the right of the state to maintain a militia, and not to the individual's right to bear arms, there can be no serious claim to any express constitutional right of an individual to possess a firearm," (Stevens v. United States).
 * **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">A ban on assault weapons is not a slippery slope to an all gun ban **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. Most individuals seeking a ban on assault weapons just want assault weapons to be banned.

<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; margin: 10pt 0in 0pt;">**// Yes //**
==== · <span style="color: windowtext; font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; font-style: normal;">**Assault weapons empower the deranged to kill many people** <span style="color: windowtext; font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal;">. <span style="color: windowtext; font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; font-style: normal;">**- While the phrase "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is used widely, what it misses is the extent to which assault weapons enable deranged individuals to kill massively.** ====
 * **The 1994 US assault weapons ban significantly decreased use.** The use of assault weapons was down 17% from 1994 levels in 2004, according to one report.
 * **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">There are fewer assault weapons at crime scenes since the ban. **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';"> "Since enactment of the law, the number of assault weapons traced to crime scenes has dropped 45%, according to Crime Gun Solutions LLC, a consulting firm." [1]
 * **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">Since the ban, there have been fewer gun fatalities. **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';"> "Deaths caused by guns dropped from 38,505 in 1994 to 29,573 in 2001, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. While crime experts say the drop resulted from several factors, such as fewer gang shootings involving crack cocaine, they cite the assault weapons ban and other gun controls passed in 1993 and 1994 as among the causes"[2]
 * **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">Assault weapons are used to kill a greater number of people **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. Assault weapons can hold and fire more rounds. This is directly proportional to how many people can be killed.
 * **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">Law enforcement agents are put at a greater risk due to assault weapons **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. Assault weapons are responsible for 1 in 5 deaths of law enforcement agents.
 * **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">Police support a ban on assault weapons **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';"> Police, those that have the most experience dealing with crime, are strongly in favor of gun control laws. Why is this? First, many cops have been killed by assault weapons, and these brave law enforcement officers must consistently deal with the fear that criminals they encounter will be packing assault weapons. Second, they recognize that assault weapons are used by some criminals and madmen to inflict maximum casualties. Finally, they see first-hand instances in which assault weapons can be used offensively and defensively, and it is notable that they conclude, ultimately, that assault weapons should not be available to the public.
 * **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">Statistics gathered during the last federal weapons ban do not include "copy-cat" weapons **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">. These types of assault weapons are not counted in the number of deaths due to assault weapons. Therefore, for at least the weapons that were banned, a drop in violence can be appropriately attributed.
 * **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';">An assault weapons ban decreases supply and increases prices, beneficially **<span style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif';"> - While it may be impossible to get rid of all assault weapons, what is possible is to decrease the supply of assault weapons. This makes them more difficult to obtain and drives up their price on the market, which makes them less attractive to prospective buyers. This all generally decreases the presence of assault weapons on the street and in crime.

** Why this was Biased ** ** The previous text was biased because like the article before it, it only displayed information for its side. In this case, the author decided to only display information that was in favor of the ban. The persuasive technique was author used statistics as a tool to prove how assault rifle deaths have dropped dramatically. There is no sign of counter argument, which might have been for a reason, so the audience wouldn’t change their minds of what they currently thought of. They author may have also done this so he/she may have not lost contributors or people who would support his/hers claim. **

Un-Biased Text
===Civilian ownership of assault rifles or any other full-automatic firearm is tightly regulated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives under the National Firearms Act of 1934 as amended by Title II of the Gun Control Act of 1968. In addition, the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986 halted the manufacture of assault rifles for the civilian market and currently limits legal civilian ownership to units produced and properly registered with the BATFE before May 1986. Some states have enacted laws against civilian possession of automatic weapons that override NFA clearance; Kansas, on the other hand, repealed its own state law against civilian ownership of assault rifles in July 2008.[24] Civilians may purchase semi-automatic versions of such firearms without requiring NFA clearance, although some states (including California and New Jersey) enforce their own restrictions and/or prohibitions on such weapons.===

Why this was Un-Biased <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">The text was unbiased because it delivered straight facts about the ban, without supporting one side, more than the other. There is no sign of Persuasive technique, and there is no sign of pro or con throughout the piece. This text was more of an informative text rather than a persuasive text because of its lack of tone, and persuasive techniques to try to get you to think about the situacion diferently.

** My Perspective **
 * After reading both articles, I have come to a conclusion where I believe that Assault rifles should not be banned. Why, you may ask, is because of the following reasons. I pulled out from article #1 that these “assault” rifles only killed 8 out 2000 people in New York. And in San Diego, of the 3000 confiscated weapons, only 9 were confiscated. So are these weapons really used for “assaults” or are people really making a big deal about it.**
 * According to federal police reports, only eighty of the 12,318 guns seized were assault rifles. More deaths have been caused by a gun, other than an assault rifle. Assault rifles were used in only 20 of the 2,000 and robberies. You know what’s even freakier, only 3% of the 14,000 weapons seized nationwide, were semi-automatic weapons.**
 * I would have to say, that in case of an emergency, in which a foreign country invades, “assault” weapons would really be needed at this point in time. These weapons are powerful and can have a great purpose for home defense. But if the ban were approved, how would we defend ourselves. According to the US Constitution, All American citizens have the right to bear arms, including “assault” rifles. So wouldn’t this ban violate the right for people carry arms and to form a militia?**
 * But I do agree with the second article, these weapons, in the hands of an evil mastermind, can be a risk for American lives. Furthermore, “assault” rifles, as they are called, can serve a meaningful purpose for defense, but day in day, out the war to keep these weapons grows stronger, and stronger.**