Introduction
The problems that the creation of gun-free zones entails are the subject of my research. The relevance and correctness of government decisions regarding restrictions on the use of weapons in specific territories, including those with a large crowd of people, are reviewed and evaluated. During the research work, I have been able to study a number of relevant resources on this topic, both from academic literature and current legislation.
By referring to credible sources, I can argue that the creation of gun-free zones cannot be seen as a preventive measure against aggression. Conversely, this activity is fraught with civilian casualties due to insecurity and the inability to resist armed criminals. During my work on the research, I have changed my vision on this issue significantly and revised the apparent objectivity of government decisions on this topic. Therefore, the responsibility that the state assumes for protecting people without the right to bear arms is too high in view of the threat posed by criminals who do not respect the law.
Changes in Understanding the Issue
When starting to work on the research project, I was ready for the fact that I would have to consider many authoritative sources and legislative provisions regarding the chosen topic. Nevertheless, in the process of studying the issue, I was not prepared for the fact that my initial assumptions would diverge significantly from a real situation. I perceived the idea of creating gun-free zones as an objectively reasonable measure that could help increase the safety of the population and reduce the number of domestic crimes.
However, as I studied relevant materials, I came to a conclusion that such an approach carried more negative than positive implications. In addition, I analyzed the statistics on this issue and was also puzzled by the results of this activity since the outcomes were at variance with my original vision of the problem. I began to look at this topic from a different perspective and reviewed the relevance of measures that turned out to be meaningless and dangerous, despite their initial preventive nature.
At the beginning of the semester, I referred to the practice of creating gun-free zones as a reasonable and adequate measure aimed at protecting the population and preventing any aggression. However, in the process of research on the issue, I changed my mind under the influence of findings proving the fallacy of my assumptions. This happened gradually while I was studying the available materials and immersed myself in the topic enough to review different positions concerning the problem and evaluate other researchers’ opinions.
In addition, I used not only academic works but also other resources, for instance, legislative acts, to assess the objectivity and legitimacy of the decision to ban the carrying of weapons on certain territories. These activities gave me an opportunity to review the relevance of the existing authorities’ approach to minimizing the threat and its real danger.
Of all the sources that have influenced my understanding of the fallacy of initial beliefs most significantly, individual academic studies have become the basis for a change in my views. However, as I studied official documents, I also became convinced of the misconception in relation to spreading the idea of the benefits of gun-free zones from a legislative perspective. For instance, in the study by Nedzel (2014), the author argues that the prohibition of carrying weapons is contrary to the Second Amendment that defines a person’s right to self-defense. This gap did not become an obstacle for policy-makers who promoted gun-free zones as potentially safe areas. As a result, statistical findings prove that expanding the black market for arms sales and pushing criminals to attack unarmed people are the real outcomes of this practice.
Current Knowledge of the Problem
Due to a wide range of available resources for study and analysis, I have been able to expand my knowledge about the implications of creating gun-free zones and gain valuable information about the problems involved. I have studied statistics and understood the reasons why crimes were committed there (criminals’ indifference to the law and a low probability of self-defense). In addition, I have realized why this practice is dangerous for employers who, by limiting the use of weapons to subordinates, thereby expose them to additional risks. The statistics of saved lives, due to the possibility of self-defense, prove that the right to bear arms increases the safety of the population and should be controlled adequately but not through complete restriction. Thus, the danger of gun-free zones exceeds the benefits that they bear, which contradicts my initial ideas about these territories.
The Lessons Drawn
At the end of my research project, I have learned valuable information and received important data about such an ambiguous social phenomenon as gun-free zones. Firstly, I got acquainted with the opinions of reputable scholars regarding the threats posed by these territories. Secondly, I studied the relevant legislation that governed creating such zones and learned about the inconsistency of the current practice of the prohibition of carrying weapons with fundamental social laws. Thirdly, I began to better understand the features of the research process as an activity that required a comprehensive assessment of a specific problem and its analysis. As a result of the work done, I have managed to find objective justifications in support of the controversial idea of creating gun-free zones and their negative consequences for the population.
Benefits of Interaction During the Research Process
Communication with the professor was useful to me throughout the entire work on the research project. I received valuable recommendations regarding the development of the topic and could count on help in drawing up a plan. In addition, I had a chance to discuss the current research process and make appropriate adjustments based on those recommendations, which helped me to conduct a productive research activity. Such interaction gave me an opportunity to maximize the disclosure of the stated theme and realize all the ideas to the full extent.
Communication with my classmates was also a valuable experience when working on the project. I could exchange experiences with others and receive feedback on my activities, thereby gaining an understanding of potential gaps and strengths. Evaluating my classmates’ studies was also a productive activity due to an opportunity to assess the research practices and methodologies that they applied. All these advantages of interaction are significant aspects that help in working on an individual project.
Conclusion
While summarizing the results of the research project on the topic discussed, I can argue that government decisions regarding the creation of gun-free zones pose more threats than benefits and should be revised. My current understanding of the issue and its manifestations will most likely reflect on my subsequent research work on socially significant topics since I will pay attention not to superficial goals but to the results of relevant interventions.
At the end of this project, I can argue about the benefits of the work done and the value of the experience gained. By mastering skills in conducting research activities, I will be able to improve my knowledge of the principles of immersion in various topics and analysis of their most important aspects. The work done deserves attention from various perspectives, including social, political, ethical, and other positions. Further research may expand the range of findings and offer additional justification in support of the threat of gun-free zones for the population.
Reference
Nedzel, N. E. (2014). Concealed carry: The only way to discourage mass school shootings. Academic Questions, 27(4), 429-435. Web.