Gun Control Legislation and Gun Violence In Trump’s Administration





Gun Control Legislation and Gun Violence In Trump’s Administration

For an extended period, there have been debates on ownership of guns and the regulations governing acquisition and ownership. This paper considers Trumps and other governmental representatives’ actions and suggestions, following a gun downs that occur in the United States. Trump, the president of the United States, has tried to review the legislation on gun control in order to stop epidemics of gun violence. I found three articles to analyze on the gun control issue. The first article of the professional news site from the NYT, second from a liberal news site, Think and a conservative news site, To analyze the articles, I used the Society of PJCE (“SPJ Code of Ethics – Society of Professional Journalists”, 2014) and identified the differences in writing styles and the information therein. The codes of Ethics are adhered to in most of the news sources, in their use to inform the audience.

The first article is from the NYT, titled, ‘Trump Weighs Action on Gun Control. But It’s Still a Theoretical Discussion’ and provides information on Trump’s actions on controlling the guns in the states (Haberman et al.,). The article is about Trump’s opinions on gun measures, including senators and statehouse officials. After a gun down where more than thirty students were killed at an elementary school, Christopher Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, communicated to senators to support a bill on background checks. The senators identify that President Trump has not put legislation on gun control that forces a bill through Congress. White House officials feel that Trump has no interest in including public opinion in gun control. I was interested in the SPJ code of ethics that states, “Take special care not to misrepresent or oversimplify in promoting, previewing or summarizing a story.” The author ensures that the speaker or source of information is specified. The article has provided the names and titles of individuals who provided views used, hence providing the right context by not misrepresenting. For example, the author mentions senator Mitch Connell and gives his title; majority leader, when giving information on President’s power to call republicans to action.

Also, in another code, “Support the open and civil exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.” (“SPJ Code of Ethics – Society of Professional Journalists”, 2014). For example, the article states that Trump is facing pushback from gun rights advocates, and this may make him drop ideas of doing some things even after promising. The statement is repugnant as this may make citizens lack trust in him; nevertheless, the author stated it. The reader is supposed to understand the stage at which the government has addressed the gun control issue since it is a problem affecting the people. The writer has clearly stated Trumps acts and the possibilities of implementing the promises he makes to the public. However, the article mentions 26 people gunned down in an elementary school and 31 people in El Paso Massacre but does not provide the progress of the case and if the affected got justice. These are sensitive issues, and I may wish to know how the authorities handled it and the legislations on guns that should be changed. After reading the article, one should find more information on Trump’s actions, after the massacres, to understand his reasons for any changes he made.

The title of the second article from is, “Mitch McConnell suggests Trump cannot be trusted to mean what he says on guns.” The work is about the leader of the majority Mitch McConnell doubts on Trump’s actions and words concerning stop on gun violence (Israel, 2019). It first acknowledges there have been a series of mass shootings in various places, and Trump had promised background checks but changes later after speaking to the public. McConnell has had an experience of a failed promise, before, with Bill Clinton, and he was honest in radio that the president promised to reinvent the government but instead used funds to reinvent his campaigns. The article tends to provide the weakness of Trump concerning gun control and gives reasons for the facts. I was interested in the SPJ code of ethics that states, “Boldly tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience.’ Seek sources whose voices we seldom hear.” I think the article proves boldness because it provides information of leadership faultiness to the public.

Also, the code, “Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable. Give voice to the voiceless”, is excellently applied. Trump is in power, and the article provides information on his accountability to the citizens or nation concerning gun control and mass shootings. Application of the code in this article attracts the readers as they wish to understand the take of their leaders on issues affecting them. The reader of this article should know the reason why gun control legislation is not working and why the president’s words cannot be trusted. However, the writer has provided the information based on one person’s opinion, that is McConnel, hence not sufficient to the writer. It limits the data to only one person; therefore, it does not give broad ideas on the issue. Consequently, the reader may not get so much information regarding the issue. It only provides McConnel’s views and opinions on Trump’s actions, which may be biased on individual concepts. Also, after the mention of the mass shootings, the article should provide a link to the materials that can provide information on the shots. After reading the article, the reader should find more evidence that supports the idea in the article; that Trump should not be trusted.

The third article from is titled, “Watch: Nancy Pelosi Gets Treated Like a Republican by the Press, and She Doesn’t Like It at All.” It is a reported article that gives the difference by which the media or press treats the politicians on the two political parties; republicans and democrats (Morse). Democrats have the opportunity to even lie without the reporter correcting them while the Republicans are given hot seat and snarl through pre-established narratives by the media. It then narrows down to Nancy Pelosi’s experience with the press. She is a Democrat, but the media treats her like a republican. She gets directed on what to talk about through the use of questions. She blamed Senator McConnell for the non-existence of advancement in gun control legislation. I was interested in the SJP code of ethics that states, “Never plagiarize. Always attribute.” The article gives information that had happened through other sources and, as such, acknowledges them. For example, the author recognizes information was gotten from an interview with San Francisco Chronicle reporter, and through the interview conversation, the writer acquired the knowledge stated in the article.

Also, under the Society of professional journalist Code of Ethics that states, “provide access to source material when it is relevant and appropriate,” the article applies it by providing a link on further reading. It first explains that the American people are losing interest in gun control; hence gun sales have increased tremendously. It then provides a link that reads, “READ: Gun Sales See Spike Despite Democrat Efforts to Slow It Down.” This link ensures that the reader gets extended information required from the article leading to more understanding. The article wishes to inform the reader of the effect of media on political parties and the party to blame on the issue of gun control that is affecting people. However, I find the topic concentrating on Nancy Pelosi, while the article speaks of the two political parties. Nancy is just used as an example to show the treat. Therefore, the topic should focus on Republicans and Democrats. The reader should find out why the blame has been put on senator McConnell for lack of legislation on gun control. She may have had some power then, when she was in office that may have prevented gun downs occurring in the country.

In the three articles, the NYT news proves to be more informative due to various characterization, and provision of lots of ideas that provide sufficient and efficient information to the audience. Also, in terms of the headline, the New York article offers the right topic to the audience. It first informs that Trump is just weighing actions against the issue and further states that there are no conclusions made, but rather a theoretical discussion. As the reader reads this, one is convinced of the information in the article and understands the conclusion made.

The three articles addressing news on gun control by the government and its officials are informative. They follow some of the code of ethics of the Society of professional journalism, hence providing context, and ensuring they don’t mislead the audience. The New York Times article offers a lot of information that enhances readers understanding and satisfaction. However, the ThinkProgress and RedState articles have limited some information that may be useful to the audience. The headlines, too, are not much informing on the content of the article, unlike the New York article, which provides full information. The new yok headline is direct to the point, understandable, and ensures the reader concentrates on the concept. The information provided and the way it is addressed determines the way the reader will interpret and believe hence proper ethics with short and comprehensive headline is appropriate.

ReferencesHaberman, M., Stolberg, S., & Martin, J. (2019). Trump Weighs Action on Gun Control. But It’s Still a Theoretical Discussion. New York Times. Retrieved 18 February 2020, from

Israel, J. (2019). Mitch McConnell suggests Trump cannot be trusted to mean what he says on guns. Thinkprogress. Retrieved 18 February 2020, from

Morse, B. (2019). Watch: Nancy Pelosi Gets Treated Like a Republican by the Press and She Doesn’t Like It at All. Redstate. Retrieved 18 February 2020, from

SPJ Code of Ethics – Society of Professional Journalists. (2014). Retrieved 18 February 2020, from