After reading through President Obama's proposal for gun control research your stance on his plan. We will debating whether or not you believe the proposals wrongly violate our rights.
In researching you will be evaluated on the following:
A. Who is the author? What credibility does he or she have on this subject?
B. What organization is publishing the article?
C. Do they have any bias? How do you know?
D. What makes this a quality article?
Standard - 1.1.4 Find, evaluate, and select appropriate sources to answer questions.
Scales for the Paragraph
Standard - WHST.9-10.9. Draw evidence from informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research.
In researching you will be evaluated on the following:
- Notes/Debate performance - you will need to have multiple notes from multiple sources that can be used to back up your debate.
- Quality source - Use at least three sites. Two can be from the list below. At least one should be found on your own.
A. Who is the author? What credibility does he or she have on this subject?
B. What organization is publishing the article?
C. Do they have any bias? How do you know?
D. What makes this a quality article?
Standard - 1.1.4 Find, evaluate, and select appropriate sources to answer questions.
- Position Paragraph - Using a KidBlog post, write a paragraph that explains your position on the proposed law. The paragraph should include at least 2 pieces of evidence that back up your stance.
Scales for the Paragraph
Standard - WHST.9-10.9. Draw evidence from informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research.
Possible Resources:
Prairie Point Research Links:
http://www.pointlibrary.org/start-research.html
SIRS Issues Researcher:
http://auth.proquestk12.com/IA/
ProCon.org:
http://www.procon.org/
Time Magazine:
http://www.time.com/
USA Today Newspaper:
http://www.usatoday.com/
New York Times Newspaper:
http://www.nytimes.com/
FactCheck.org:
http://factcheck.org/
Prairie Point Research Links:
http://www.pointlibrary.org/start-research.html
SIRS Issues Researcher:
http://auth.proquestk12.com/IA/
ProCon.org:
http://www.procon.org/
Time Magazine:
http://www.time.com/
USA Today Newspaper:
http://www.usatoday.com/
New York Times Newspaper:
http://www.nytimes.com/
FactCheck.org:
http://factcheck.org/
Examples:Scales for the Paragraph
I am strongly opposed to continuing without a 10 round clip regulation. An example of when this regulation would have been extremely beneficial would be the Arizona shooting. The assailant was finally wrestled to the ground after pausing to reload. Had his clip contained 10 rounds versus 31, he would have been wrestled to the ground sooner. In addition, a Police force researcher Christopher Koper states that only about 1 out of every 4 bullets actually strike their intended target. Therefore, the more shots able to be fired, the more victims fall prey to the spray of rounds. Furthermore, this ban would be irrelevant in the case of self defense. According to a well supported author John Lott, in most cases of self defense the gun is only brandished and not actually fired. Therefore, I side with the 58% of surveyors in saying that this regulation as well as others should be put into effect.
I think that they should restrict the gun clips because you don’t need anything larger than 10, if even 10, unless you are in the war. I think it’s ridiculous to think that an average citizen would need a 30+ clip to defend their home/family. I have shot guns and gone hunting, and no time have I ever needed more than 3 rounds. Although the gun can’t be blamed, the person who shot it should not have had access to such a big magazine. Overall, if they can prevent more deaths by banning bigger clips, why not?
Example paragraph using links:
On Wednesday, Virginia's Republican-controlled legislature became one of the first to advance a bill that would allocate electoral votes by congressional district. Last week, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus endorsed pushing through similar proposals in other states with Republican legislative majorities.
I am strongly opposed to continuing without a 10 round clip regulation. An example of when this regulation would have been extremely beneficial would be the Arizona shooting. The assailant was finally wrestled to the ground after pausing to reload. Had his clip contained 10 rounds versus 31, he would have been wrestled to the ground sooner. In addition, a Police force researcher Christopher Koper states that only about 1 out of every 4 bullets actually strike their intended target. Therefore, the more shots able to be fired, the more victims fall prey to the spray of rounds. Furthermore, this ban would be irrelevant in the case of self defense. According to a well supported author John Lott, in most cases of self defense the gun is only brandished and not actually fired. Therefore, I side with the 58% of surveyors in saying that this regulation as well as others should be put into effect.
I think that they should restrict the gun clips because you don’t need anything larger than 10, if even 10, unless you are in the war. I think it’s ridiculous to think that an average citizen would need a 30+ clip to defend their home/family. I have shot guns and gone hunting, and no time have I ever needed more than 3 rounds. Although the gun can’t be blamed, the person who shot it should not have had access to such a big magazine. Overall, if they can prevent more deaths by banning bigger clips, why not?
Example paragraph using links:
On Wednesday, Virginia's Republican-controlled legislature became one of the first to advance a bill that would allocate electoral votes by congressional district. Last week, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus endorsed pushing through similar proposals in other states with Republican legislative majorities.