In James Wilson's "Just Take Away Their Guns," the columnist makes a powerful case for stricter gun control; in the wake of stricter gun control legislation, Wilson believes that adding more paperwork will simply not have a great deal of effectiveness in keeping guns off the streets: "Legal restraints on the lawful purchase of guns will have little effect on the illegal use of guns" (Wilson). Citing statistics on illegal and legally purchased guns, as well as the current state of police resources towards stopping illegal carrying of guns, Wilson believes that more police power to take away unlicensed firearms will lead to fewer fatalities in our nation's cities. In essence, according to Wilson, "The most effective way to reduce illegal gun-carrying is to encourage the police to take guns away from people who carry them without a permit" (Wilson).
Though Wilson's argument is compelling, he does make some troublesome leaps in reasoning to do so, as his solution may not achieve the positive results he desires. This makes his overall solution clear, and the rest of the argument surrounding it supports this central assertion. The use of statistics is incredibly compelling; by citing statistics which state that measures to limit lawfully purchased guns would put more innocent lives in danger, he uses research data to perfectly fuel his argument. His solution is then to allow the police to frisk people on the street; he cites the Constitution's ban on unreasonable search and seizure, and then goes on to define precedent that has defined these actions as reasonable.
Wilson even provides potential solutions for making his proposal workable; metal detectors carried by police are advocated by Wilson to aid them in the frisking and gun discovery process. However, Wilson claims this to help constitute reasonable grounds for a pat-down, which no evidence is suggested to support that, or discount the possibility that it does not detect a gun, but instead someone's keys. The advocacy of greater police powers is troublesome, and Wilson does not convince that this is not an extremely reactionary view of the potential for gang violence. Instead of focusing on taking away guns, Wilson's argument might be better served by attempting to suggest ways of helping the socioeconomic problems that lead to the gang violence his argument frequently cites. As it stands, gang life and city life are painted in broad strokes that almost seem like dogwhistle racism; "Guns often convert spontaneous outbursts of anger into fatal encounters" (Wilson). Wilson attempts to reconcile opposing arguments, but these arguments are brushed off as foolish without a proper examination of the evidence, making the argument somewhat one-sided.
In conclusion, Wilson makes a compelling argument, using statistics and emotional appeals to advocate for greater police powers to take away illegal guns: "if we are serious about reducing drive-by shootings, fatal gang wars and lethal quarrels in public places, we must get illegal guns off the street" (Wilson). However, by making the counterargument seem as though they are absurd and ignorant of the facts, it repaints their argument as thinking guns are no big deal; making the solution simply cracking down on crime even further. Given the complex issues that lead to gang violence, adding greater police powers is not something Wilson can fully convince his readers to accept as wholeheartedly as he may like.
Works Cited
Wilson, James. "Just Take Away Their Guns." New York Times. March 10, 1994.
