Gun Nation. Sociology sample

Free EssaysSociologyGun Nation
← Women Rights in the United States of AmericaLeading and Managing people Across Cultures →

The Gun Nation is a show that involves the misadventures of an anti-gun activity called Pia Lalli of Massachusetts. Pia exists for 30 days in a pro-gun family of Ekermeyer and their son Zach in the rural area town Leesburg, Ohio. The anti-gun activist is in the position to learning gun handling while working at a gun store at the time (“Synopsis for 30 Days Gun Nation”).

Pia is opposed to the idea of gun possession due to the fact that it attributes many deaths to gun misuse (“30 Days episodes”). She reasons that as long as people have allowed access to guns, they are likely to use them too, thus causing harm by killing innocent people. The gun adherents are less concerned about the number of deaths that are reported to result from gun misuse. They have a perception that the idea of people killing others is an overused clich?’ lacking solid justification. Mr. Ekermeyer was never proud of his son until the moment his son managed to get a gun. The Gun Nation is a show of a family that has no reason to come together and to show love for each other. The only thing that forms a bond between the father and his son, Zach, is a possession and use of guns. It is not surprising, based on the love for ownership, that Kent appeared helpless, miserable, and completely silent in front of the victims of gun violence. The victims told him that he had to know someone or to go through gun violence himself for having a full knowledge of the damage that guns can cause. According to Pia, it is only the military and the police officers having reasons to carry arms (“Synopsis for 30 Days Gun Nation”). Guns are very sensitive and capable of causing much harm to people. The levels of such negative influence require gun possession to be restricted. Uncontrolled ownership of guns in Ohio is evidently causing many deaths and increased crime rates. This show also gives a clear illustration of how families can fail in their parenting role (Shafii and Shafii 77).

Kent argues that laws used to govern gun ownership are good for the gun-abiding citizens. This is not true as thorough research of the situation clearly shows that laws only benefit for those who aim at breaking them (“30 Days episodes”). Law-abiding citizens do not have reasons to possess any gun. In private transactions, Morgan explains that laws, which require determination of the formal transaction, are violated, and people only need the names and address to conduct a successful private gun business. This is a show of ignorance and disrespect for the law. Besides, it reveals people to be less concerned about their well-being as they involve themselves in the unlawful arms traffic. The reported loopholes in private trade in arms, where the law is violated, explain the reason behind the consistent shootings that are witnessed in schools. In situations where schools are vulnerable to rapid shootings, it is clear that insecurity has reached its peak and no one can claim to be safe. It is also a show of failure by the government to exercise its control over illegal trading and unauthorized gun possession.

Order now

In addition to this, it is unreasonably to assume that gun ownership has no negative implications as all who own guns would use them wisely according to the law. The arguments offered for gun ownership support by the pro-gun individuals are outdated and unrealistic. Morgan disputes the idea that gun owners can use their guns responsibly. She gives statistical data to prove that about 30,000 deaths are reported yearly as a result of gun misuse. Like most of other gun adherents, Kent failed to consider the statistical data about the cases of gun violence. The gun use supporters have perverted understanding that having people armed can help to reduce the crime rate. They fail to consider the actual situation, which is characterized by massive insecurity as they make their unsatisfactory claim that the solution to crimes is in widespread gun ownership.

Generally, this episode helps to show that the arguments given by gun adherents in support to gun possession freedom are baseless. It shows that the violation of rules governing gun ownership is a loophole that can hazard the security of the whole country. The case presented in this case gives the picture of other countries that do not have strict anti-gun ownership laws. As for Leesburg, a town in Ohio, such countries are likely to suffer many attributed to uncontrolled gun ownership crimes.

Same Sex Parenting

The next episode is about a Californian adopter who is a mother of two adopted sons. That woman was against the idea of same-sex parenting, and she has been living for a month with a gay couple in Michigan. The couple has also adopted four sons. The Californian spent much time going to church together with the Michigan couple. She also travelled to state capital, Lansing, to attend and participate in a rally that is organized in support for the adherence to adoption rights for lesbian and gay couples. While being in the rally, the lady met a group of lesbian mothers. Besides, the lady met former foster children (“For One Anti-Gay Woman, 30 Days Is Not Time Enough”). The children opened up discussion of the growing up experience without parents as contrasted to having a permanent residence (Derfner 220).

Looking at this episode from a Christian perspective, it is worth mentioning that gay adoption is allowable provided that the adopters are ready to take good care of the adopted children. The latter, if growing up parentless, are subjected to immeasurable difficulties that threaten their development. Having a parent, who has offered to adopt and take care of the children, can help them access proper parenting, thus grow up responsibly (Kaye 47).

In this case, Kati is not a Christian. However, she demonstrated remarkable behavior by her responding the questions asked. Christians should never oppose the idea of gay adoption. Some adopters raise homeless children's hope that would have ended up in the streets and turned into serious criminals due to the lack of effective care and proper upbringing. The episode shows two men who must have played a significant role in providing a home to the children they adopted. There are many sins in the world, so the homosexuality should just be regarded as one of the many sins that are condemned by the bible (“For One Anti-Gay Woman, 30 Days Is Not Time Enough”).

There is no individual that can claim to be capable of determining what the gay can do as well as what they should not be allowed to do (“For One Anti-Gay Woman, 30 Days Is Not Time Enough”). All people must accept the idea that they are sinners and they need to repent of their sins. The best judge for people’s deeds is God but not pastors. Several cases have been reported where pastors themselves are involved into sinful activities. Some pastors have gay sons and have just to accept and love them. It was interesting to note that Kati and the men did not come to an agreement at the end. First of all, gays must be accepted and loved by the society, and then convinced of the status. This can be a sure way to make them change so as to adopt Christianity. It is not possible to stop homosexuality by restricting them to anything.

Christians lead their lives with close consideration of the life nature led by Jesus. Consequently, Christians should never isolate the gay members of the society as Jesus himself accepted to serve all people irrespective of their sinful nature. By accepting sinners, the people are able to learn their evil deeds and influence them to change without being forced. No one can be saved with the help of a forceful act. It is necessary for Christians to live by following Jesus' ideas about accepting prostitutes and all other kinds of sinful people. Christians should show gays the love of God and allow them to decide for themselves what they want to be. This means that they should not be banned against adopting children as they can also have a desire for some sort of company.

People do not have the right to judge other people’s deeds only right or wrong. This is the God's responsibility and it should remain this way. It is God who can judge homosexuals and decide to accept them or not. The notion that children must have a mother and a father to grow up and develop properly is outdated. In the current society, the normal growth of children is not only determined by the presence of both male and female parents. Instead, the parents, regardless of their sex, are responsible for providing children with home and other basic needs. Children need proper parenting in order to grow up properly and become valid members of the society. It does not matter whether they are brought up by a gay, Christian, black, or white. The main thing is that whoever takes care of a child should be given a chance to adopt it. When a gay family or individual adopts a child, they do not intend to teach it how to be gay but to provide home. This opinion is based on the understanding that such child would end up a criminal unless be given a proper home and parenting (“For One Anti-Gay Woman, 30 Days Is Not Time Enough”).

Based on this reasons, the position taken by Katie and Patrick is unjustified. It is right that people have their personal opinions on issues but such opinions should not be used to dictate to others. It is important for everyone to be more concerned with his or her own affairs and to care about the general good of mankind rather than to personalize situations and dictate what is good or bad.

Life on an Indian Reservation

This is the third-season finale in which Morgan Spurlock gives a vivid exploration of the Native American culture. It is the presentation of his 30-days stay in the New Mexico’s Navajo reservation. A Native American, who has PhD degree, hosts Spurlock (“30 Days episodes”). The host’s husband is a physics instructor in college. Moreover, the husband is a rodeo competitor. The family consists of the educated members who also demonstrated their being highly preservative of their ancestral culture. During his adventure, Spurlock spent several nights in a traditional and less accommodative dwelling. The dwelling's owner (known as hogan) works at a tire store. The whole story is based on the experience of Spurlock living 30 days with people whose ideology was different from his own.

The show ran in 2008, and the creator presened himself as an adventurer who learnt about a few concepts in Native American life (“30 Days episodes”). One is likely to assume that the show relates to Spurlock’s lack of interest while experiencing some ideological change. Spurlock toured many places including Indian reservations and coal mines and finally found himself most comfortable at home. At the end of the episode, Spurlock made a declaration that there are several values that can be found in the experiences despite the fact that life is complicated.

The adventure that Spurlock had on a Navajo reservation near Gallup in New Mexico appears to be somehow smooth and pleasant but not negative at all. It is common that most of present-day Native Americans find themselves having unpleasant lives on the west reservations. However, Spurlock seems to be more interested in similarities rather than differences. He is more concern about various aspects of Native American life including family values, religious traditions, and what fathers want for their children. Furthermore, he is amused by these aspects just because they are not common to families all over the country.

Alcoholism is the main issue that is highly published to be a threat to the Native Americans. This problem is linked to the high rate of unemployment. This fact is quite evident in Navajo as well as in other communities. An unemployment is shown as a serious threat that results into poverty. To find out methods against alcoholism, Spurlock did a late night ride together with a Navajo police officer. As it is shown in the experiment, it emerges clearly that alcoholism is a result of unemployment. This happened due to the fact that unemployment contributes to the low income among African-Americans and the impoverished white communities (Treuer 270). To solve the drug problem, government should demonstrate interest in handling unfavorable economic factors (Alexie and Forney 43).

In the final part of the episode, Spurlock asked the most vital question. He sought for the special thing about Navajo culture that makes the residents be more attracted to it despite the challenges because the whole world outside is ready to accommodate them. Instead of digging into this matter, Spurlock took his time to learn the people’s language for two weeks without success. However, he managed to establish the cultural impact on the Navajo language that became extinct with generational changes. In the end, Spurlock came to an understanding the culture of the Navajo when he was talking to medicine man. He also underwent a cleansing ritual (“30 Days episodes”).

Generally, the episode is less specific. Several scenes seem to describe cultural exploration; however, little effort was taken to an actual exploration. The episode seems to be less informative in terms of attaining its objective due to the pending issues. However, the level of kindness that was shown by Dennison's and Spurlock’s reactions shows honest traits that the episode was intended to illustrate.

Related essays

  1. Leading and Managing people Across Cultures
  2. Civil War in Ukraine as a Result of Cultural Confrontation between Western and Eastern Regions
  3. Women Rights in the United States of America
  4. How do Chemists Compile their Findings?
live chat