You would not expect me to wear a firearm; otherwise you would run away instead of listening to me. But if I put my hand in a pocket, like this, and you would imagine the shape of a small gun there, would you keep on staring until I make a shot from inside by pocket or take out a crumpled handkerchief to blow my nose? Statistically, only 9 percent of violent crimes were committed by an offender with a firearm; 2 percent of offenders get their guns from a flea market, 12 percent buy them in a retail store, and over 80 percent get their guns from family, friends, a street buy, and other illegal sources (Firearms, 2005). Gun companies take reasonable precautions to prevent misuse of their products. In thirty American states, legislations block city governments from suing gun companies.

Gun companies improve their products. Their business is legal, and they are not stopped from making sophisticated tools of death. Isn't it understandable that a firearm is for killing? Isn't it understandable that it may save your life when facing an armed criminal or lunatic, as well? Is it reasonable to blame gun companies, legal taxpayers, for the specific tools of death they produce and sell officially?

A gun company may be sued when a firearm explodes in the hands of a gun owner or fails to shoot when supposed to make a good shot. In case a gun owner misuses enclosed instructions, the company may prove that it is not its fault. A gun company may not be sued if criminals consider its products perfect for their criminal aims. What is more, a gun company has a legal right to introduce improvements that produce high quality firearms. Moreover, a gun company can design various firearms that can be hidden almost everywhere, unseen for the last moment that may be fatal to the offender's victim. In other words, gun companies are not sued for their ability to produce powerful destructive firearms, if these arms are not prohibited for sale.

New York was the first state to sue gun companies, such as Glock, Sturm-Ruger, Colt's, Beretta, Taurus, Bryco, and Intratec for violating New York State laws. Attorney General Spitzer charged nine gun manufacturers, blaming them for selling guns into the criminal market. When gun companies are not found guilty, they cannot be held responsible for gun crimes. Gun companies transfer this responsibility to a gun owner who has legal permission to own a gun.

Although gun companies take steps to prevent misuse of their dangerous products. the effective way is to negotiate reforms with gun manufacturers. Gun manufacturers cannot solely be responsible for gun assaults.


Further information on Persuasive Speech:

Persuasive speech basics: definition, structure, topics, requirements and more
Sample Persuasive Speech: Career objectives
Sample Persuasive Speech: Global warming is real/not real
Sample Persuasive Speech: Human cloning (moral?)
Sample Persuasive Speech: Single parent adoption (yes/no)
Sample Persuasive Speech: Video games do/do not promote violence
Sample Persuasive Speech: Marijuana should/should not be legalized
Sample Persuasive Speech: Juveniles should/should not be tried as adults
Sample Persuasive Speech: Using cell phones while driving is dangerous
Sample Persuasive Speech: The case for/against genetically modified food
Sample Persuasive Speech: Love is more powerful than hate
Sample Persuasive Speech: Sale of human organs should be legal/illegal
Sample Persuasive Speech: Gun companies should/should not be held Responsible for gun crimes
Sample Persuasive Speech: Does television have a negative influence on society?
Sample Persuasive Speech: Is sport really good for us?
Sample Persuasive Speech: Should We be in Iraq?

Order the customized persuasive speech that will satisfy your specific requirements! The completed speech will be delivered to you via electronic mail within 3 business days. Rush delivery is available! ORDER NOW      READ DETAILS

Not what you expected? Please, help us improve our content by giving your feedback! We will appreciate your opinion.