Good read! Thanks for sharing.
This is a discussion on Tell me what you think of my work.... (concealed carry on campus) within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; its already been submitted, but i was curious as to what actual ccw persons think. researchpapersum2010.pdf...
its already been submitted, but i was curious as to what actual ccw persons think.
Good read! Thanks for sharing.
Sometimes in life you have to stand your ground. It's a hard lesson to learn and even most adults don't get it, but in the end only I can be responsible for my life. If faced with any type of adversity, only I can overcome it. Waiting for someone else to take responsibility is a long fruitless wait.
It looks like you did your homework and put together a good paper. I would not count on it changing any minds though.
"I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".
Let me first ask - for what course did you write this? An English course, poli sci, history? I'm a tough grader, so... fasten your seat belt. You asked.
You covered a lot of ground and you did good research, but from a composition and structure standpoint, I'd give you a C. Content and logical argument-wise, I'd give you a B/B- for having the guts to present a view which is clearly in academia.
Here's a very brief critique: Lay out your premise in a brief opening paragraph that sets the reader up for the reasoning/argument which follows. Use the subsequent paragraphs to present your case, and to offer conflicting arguments with evidence from your research with which to shoot them down. Then use a final paragraph to concisely summarize and to re-state the opening premise which your evidence supports.
Technically - with respect to content, be aware that the North Dakota and Vermont examples showing low crime rates where concealed carry is legal will be (successfully?) shot down on the basis of population density. Make sure you cut that counter argument off at the knees in your paper. You also have a number of grammar and usage errors which I would correct before submitting for a senior-level paper.
Again, I'm a tough grader so don't be discouraged by my critique. If you want to use this paper as a foundation for future work, I'll even offer to help you improve it. You get points for broaching a topic which is virtually untouchable in the ivory towers of academia, so just view me as the drill sergeant who just wants you to refine your skills.
NRA Endowment Member
NROI Chief Range Officer
it was written for a sophomore level college english class.
im my defense i wrote this paper in a total of about 9hrs of work including research.
Well, you asked and I was brutally honest. Not a teacher, just a literate engineer and technical writer. Overall, that was a good job for less than a day's effort.
NRA Endowment Member
NROI Chief Range Officer
I am also a brutal grader. Not a teacher, but I have a dabbling background in research writing for political science, for which I did a literature review on defensive gun use. I would give you a C- on formatting (Grammar is actually not too bad, but the paper formatting is bizarre. Some paragraphs are indented, some are not, some words are randomly bolded, and you tend toward long paragraphs that have multiple subjects that may only be tangentially related. Those first few issues may be the result of conversion from a word processor document into a .pdf, that happens a lot), a B- on the strength of your argument (It is evident that you did a fair amount of background research, but one weakness there is that instead of tracking down primary sources, you often rely on the research of organizations that have a clear interest in your side of the argument. There is nothing wrong with using these type of sources, but your source credibility is much more likely to be questioned- best to go to your source's sources in those cases), and a C+ overall, primarily because your paper reads like a long list of circumstantial evidence without a clear thesis. I don't blame you for this, all the papers I did on short notice kind of stank... it's kind of a byproduct of deadlines and the desire to simply have something to turn in.
My overarching concern with this paper is that you assume a great deal. Whenever someone posts something like this, it generally gets good reviews, but you have to keep in mind that you're preaching to the choir... who are all prone to the same assumptions you are, because 99% of us already agree with you.
Your conclusion has some problems. You say "Simply put, the current unconstitutional practices of most post-secondary institutions prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms has now become a constitutional matter, no longer in the hands of politicians and special-interest groups."
1. No court has specifically said that post-secondary schools cannot ban the carry of concealed firearms. But it has not yet (ever?) been found to be "unconstitutional." Heller v. D.C. and McDonald v. Chicago are both riddled with vague possible exceptions that still leave the door almost entirely open to all kinds of regulation... just not outright bans. You're essentially taking your opinion as fact.
Should it be unconstitutional? I think everyone here would agree, at least for government-funded schools. But that hasn't been decided yet.
The other problem with this statement is that this issue has always been constitutional, and without a doubt, that kind of does put it squarely in the hands of politicians and special interest groups.
2. You conclude "The future of concealed carry on campus has become much more probable now that it has become evident that the Supreme Court will make the final decision."
The former part of that sentence is meaningless, and the last part of it is completely unsupported. The future of concealed carry on campus is 100% probable- whether or not that future will involve legal and school policy-approved carry on campus is totally up in the air- but concealed carry on campus does have some future. Of some kind. Furthermore, you never present any evidence in your paper that indicates that the Supreme Court intends to make any decision regarding this issue. It is easily inferred that you think they should, and that you think that they should rule in our favor, but there is no evidence that they intend to even consider the specific issue of carrying guns on campus.
In any case, it's not terrible paper for being done in nine hours, but it's still evident that it was done in nine hours.
Not my circus, not my monkeys.
I found one spelling error in the first paragraph.
Applicants nationwide for concealed weapons permits are required to undergo extensive background checks at the county, state, and federal level to prove that they are a safe, lab abiding citizen in order to receive their concealed carry permit.
in the second paragraph..."less" should be "fewer"...
States and locals with lax or nonexistent concealed weapons laws are also proven to have considerably less occurrences of violent crimes that states that severely restrict access to concealed weapons permits (FBI Uniform Crime Report ‘08).
Unknown reference in paragraph 3...(Txxxxxxx 2).
Besides those, there are obvious formatting problems with the paragraphs.
Nill illigitimi carborundum
Captain von Trapp: If the Nazis take over Austria, I have no doubt, Herr Zeller, that you will be the entire trumpet section.
Herr Zeller: You flatter me, Captain.
Captain von Trapp: Oh, how clumsy of me - I meant to accuse you.