1
Unit IV
Lesson 4: The Introduction
Introduction
We suggest that you complete your introduction after you write your literature review. Why is
that? There are a few reasons why writing your introduction second is a better idea than writing
it before the literature review.
•
•
The introduction is a kind of summary: The introduction presents the reader with a
general understanding of the topics that the paper will cover.
It is often easier to write this summary after you write the literature review: The
literature review is a section of the paper that paraphrases and summarizes the basic
arguments that are presented within the controversy. Many times, establishing what you
already know about the controversy by writing the literature review can help you to better
know what should be included in the introduction.
There are even those who begin writing their literature review and then continue on to the body
and conclusion before writing the introduction last. While this is not the order that we will be
writing your paper, it is good to know that while the introduction may come first in the paper, it
is not often written first. In fact, many writers return to the introduction after they have
completed an entire draft in order to change the details of the sentences, including adjusting the
thesis statement to match the content of the paper itself.
What is an Introduction?
An introduction is the first paragraph of a research paper. We know that an introduction should
preface the material that comes afterwards by familiarizing the reader with the general concepts.
The thesis statement should be placed at the end of this paragraph.
The Purpose of the Introduction
An introduction sets the stage for the rest of your paper. If you do not include an introduction or
your introduction is weak, the reader may have difficulty understanding your topic or your
argument. Whatever you include in the introduction becomes the foundation for the entire paper,
so you want to give the reader a strong understanding of what you will be doing for the rest of
the paper.
The Content
A good introduction should have a logical flow. The best way to achieve this characteristic is to
begin with the general topic and then move into more detailed specifics so that your reader will
best understand how you came to your thesis statement. To illustrate this concept, let’s take a
2
look at an example introduction below, and then parse the rhetorical moves that the writer is
making to better understand how you can achieve a logical flow in your own work.
Below is Amanda’s paper. She wanted to write about gun control, but she realized early on in her
project that she could not write about all of gun control, so she decided to focus on the issue of
mass shootings. To help her narrow the scope of the project even further, she decided to weigh in
on a controversy that she has seen in the local news: the controversy about a state legislative bill
(SB 1474) that would allow students, teachers, and staff to openly carry firearms on university
campuses in Arizona. Now, let’s take a look at Amanda’s introduction to her research paper;
then let’s take a closer look at the moves she is making:
Much has been made in the past few years about gun restrictions in the United States.
Proponents of gun regulation are in a constant state of lobbying for state and federal bills
that restrict access to firearms, whether that takes the form of more extensive background
checks on potential gun owners or longer waiting periods before guns may be sold to
individuals. On the other side, the National Rifle Association (NRA) and other likeminded individuals advocate for looser restrictions on the sale and carrying of firearms.
For these supporters of pro-gun legislation, owning and carrying guns is a fundamental
right—even a civil right. While this national debate continues to loom over the hot topic
of guns, there are breaking news stories, especially within the last few months, that bring
this fundamental debate to the threshold of our nation’s colleges, high schools, and even
elementary schools. Seung-Hui Cho’s massacre at Virginia Tech (April 16, 2007) is
perhaps one of the more infamous school shootings, but there are others that are perhaps
more difficult to remember, like the deaths of 27 killed at Sandy Hook Elementary
School in Newton, Connecticut (December 14, 2012). Shootings like these in educational
settings have drawn attention from both anti-gun proponents and pro-gun lobbyists, and
the State of Arizona is no exception to this firestorm. The Arizona State Legislature has
proposed SB 1474, a gun bill that will allow students and faculty to carry guns on the
campus grounds of its three state-funded universities. Supporters of the bill claim that
Arizona is an open-carry state, and those rights should not be restricted simply because
the carrier crosses the border of a college campus. Those against the bill assert that guns
have no place in education and that those who support the bill are only after their own
election-year agendas. While the Second Amendment should be upheld, the educational
learning environment should be protected; therefore, SB 1474 is a detrimental and
dangerous bill that has the potential to change the university campus culture in Arizona
state universities.
Now that you have read through the introduction completely, let’s label the rhetorical moves she
is making so that we can create a list of moves that you will want to emulate when you write
your own paper.
Sentence 1 (S1): Much has been made in the past few years about gun restrictions in the United
States. Proponents of gun regulation are in a constant state of lobbying for state and federal bills
that restrict access to firearms, whether that takes the form of more extensive background checks
on potential gun owners or longer waiting periods before guns may be sold to individuals.
3
S1 Explanation: This sentence introduces the main topic of the paper, which is “gun
control.” The topic is presented in a generalized manner. In addition, this sentence does
the double work of introducing the con side of the argument.
Sentence 2 & 3: On the other side, the National Rifle Association (NRA) and other like-minded
individuals advocate for looser restrictions on the sale and carrying of firearms. For these
supporters of pro-gun legislation, owning and carrying guns is a fundamental right—even a civil
right.
S2 & 3 Explanation: This sentence follows S1 by introducing the position of the pro
side. Again, Amanda is general, focusing on the larger controversy.
Sentence 4: While this national debate continues to loom over the hot topic of guns, there are
breaking news stories, especially within the last few months, that bring this fundamental debate
to the threshold of our nation’s colleges, high schools, and even elementary schools.
S4 Explanation: Amanda begins to narrow the scope of the project by pointing toward a
specific debate within the larger controversy of gun control: gun control in educational
settings.
Sentence 5: Seung-Hui Cho’s massacre at Virginia Tech (April 16, 2007) is perhaps one of the
more infamous school shootings, but there are others that are perhaps more difficult to
remember, like the deaths of 27 killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton,
Connecticut (December 14, 2012).
S5 Explanation: This sentence brings in examples from the news. Note that these are
examples of school shootings with which most readers will be familiar because of their
infamous nature. These examples ground the project to what is at stake in making
arguments about the topic, specifically mass shootings within educational settings. The
inclusion of these examples is not about the con or pro sides of the controversy; instead,
these examples enable the reader to connect with the content.
Sentence 6: Shootings like these in educational settings have drawn attention from both anti-gun
proponents and pro-gun lobbyists, and the State of Arizona is no exception to this firestorm.
S6 Explanation: Again, the writer narrows the scope of the project by moving from gun
control in the educational setting to a specific location: the State of Arizona.
Sentence 7: The Arizona State Legislature has proposed SB 1474, a gun bill that will allow
students and faculty to carry guns on the campus grounds of its three state-funded universities.
S7 Explanation: In this sentence, the writer introduces the specific topic of the project:
the controversy around . This sentence is not about the pro or con sides, but is about
providing information to the reader so that the reader understands what the object of
controversy is.
4
Sentence 8 & 9: Supporters of the bill claim that Arizona is an open-carry state, and those rights
should not be restricted simply because the carrier crosses the border of a college campus. Those
against the bill assert that guns have no place in education and that those who support the bill are
only after their own election-year agendas.
S8 & 9 Explanation: Amanda presents the con and pro sides of the controversy by
introducing the specific positions of first the con and then the pro sides.
Sentence 10: While the Second Amendment should be upheld, the educational learning
environment should be protected; therefore, SB 1474 is a detrimental and dangerous bill that has
the potential to change the university campus culture in Arizona state universities.
S10 Explanation: The writer presents her thesis statement at the end of the paragraph as
the last sentence. Amanda responds to the controversy by crafting a thesis statement that
simultaneously agrees and disagrees.
The Form
The introduction should be written in one paragraph. The average introduction for a research
paper like this one has around 10 sentences, like the example above. Let’s take a look at the list
of moves that you will need to make for your own introduction. Each sentence has a purpose and
delivers information that will help your reader to better understand the controversy at hand and
your thesis statement response to that controversy.
One way that an introduction is often described is that it is much like an inverted pyramid,
wherein the top is generalized (large-scale topic) and the bottom is very narrow (the thesis
statement). Let’s take a look at a visual:
5
S1: General topic
S2: Pro side (general)
S3: Con side (general)
S4: Narrow the scope (1)
S5: Example(s) of this narrowed scope
S6: Narrow the scope (2)
S7: Specific controversy
S8: Pro side
(specific)
S9: Con side
(specific)
S10:
Thesis
Sentence 1: Introduce the general topic: In this first sentence, you will present the main
generalized topic of your project, so do not include the specifics of your project just yet.
Sentence 2: Pro side: Present the position of the pro side on the generalized topic. (Note: The
con side can be presented first.)
Sentence 3: Con side: Present the position of the con side on the generalized topic. (Note: The
pro side can be presented first.)
Sentence 4: Narrowing the scope (1): The topic will be narrowed twice in the introduction.
This is the first narrowing. No matter how you narrow, you want to find a way to hone the scope
of the project so that you are not covering a topic that is far too generalized. As we have
discussed before, the more narrowed your topic, the more you will have to say about the specific
situation. In the example, Amanda narrowed the first time by narrowing the topic to gun control
within an educational setting.
6
Sentence 5: Examples of the narrowed topic: This sentence is optional, but you should be
encouraged to include at least one example because including an example will help the reader to
understand what it is that you are discussing. Further, as discussed above, including an example
will also help the reader relate to the topic. So often, our explanations are not as helpful as one or
two good examples that drive home a point that cannot be easily grasped otherwise.
Sentence 6: Narrow the scope (2): In this sentence, you are narrowing the scope again. In the
example, Amanda narrowed from the topic of gun control within educational settings to a
specific location: Arizona.
Sentence 7: Specific controversy: This is a key sentence in your introduction because this is
where the readers will finally be introduced to the specific controversy that you will be
discussing within the paper. This sentence introduces the focal point of the entire project.
Sentence 8: Pro side (specific): Now that the reader knows the specific controversy, you are
able to introduce the pro side’s position on the specific topic. In this way, this sentence prefaces
the deeper discussion that you included in the literature review.
Sentence 9: Con side (specific): The specific position of the con side is introduced.
Sentence 10: The thesis: The last sentence of your paragraph will assert your thesis statement.
Again, your thesis statement should be a response to the controversy. You should agree,
disagree, or agree and disagree simultaneously.
Follow the sentence template above and see the example introduction and literature review for
more direction.
Reflection
In this unit, we have discussed both the introduction and the literature review. Throughout the
process of writing both of these sections, you have no doubt gained a better understanding of the
controversy that you are exploring with your paper. You probably have a better sense of your
argument and what you would like your points to be for your body paragraphs. Consider what
you have experienced over the last few weeks. We are at the halfway point in the course, so think
about how far you have come.
Research Topic: Effectiveness of Gun control regulations as a method to reduce crime
The topic of gun control measures to minimize crime interests me. I have some ideas
about the topic of gun control. The U.S has more than 120.5 guns in every 100 people. The total
number of guns in the U.S can be approximated to 393,347,000. The total number of guns in the
U.S is the highest in the world. 35% of men and 12% of women own guns in America, the total
population who own guns is 22%. Proponents believe that gun control regulation will reduce
deaths as a result of gunshots in the United States. I am interested in the many gun owners
existing in the U.S and the rising rates of crime. Guns continue to be manufactured and used by
people.
The thought I have about the topic is that regulating gun ownership will reduce the crime
rates in the states. Lack of guns will prevent people from engaging in crime. I expect to discover
the effectiveness of gun control regulations as a method to minimize crime in the U.S. I expect to
discover the gun control laws and ways they assist in managing crime. I expect to discover
opposing arguments to the effectiveness of gun control laws. I hope to learn about probable
actions to minimize crime if gun control does not work. I hope to learn about gun control laws in
other countries and their effectiveness in minimizing crime. Right now, I assume that gun control
laws are an effective method to minimize crime. With gun control laws very few people will own
guns, therefore minimizing the potential to commit a crime as the weapon exists. I assume that
the less gun owners, the less the crime rates.
RUNNING HEAD: EFFECTIVENESS OF GUN CONTROL REGULATIONS AS A METHOD TO REDUCE
CRIME
1
Effectiveness of Gun control regulations as a method to reduce crime
Student’s name:
Columbia Southern University
EFFECTIVENESS OF GUN CONTROL REGULATIONS AS A METHOD TO REDUCE CRIME
2
Effectiveness of Gun control regulations as a method to reduce crime
Everitt, L., & Pratt, E. (2015). Does the U.S. Need Tougher Gun-Control Laws?. New York
Times Upfront, 147(12), 22-23.
This article presents a debate on whether the U.S needs more strict gun control laws to
manage the high number of crimes. The debate starts by identifying the U.S Supreme Court
landmark case ruling of 2008 that allowed people to own guns. Some people argue that the
country needs more strict regulations while others argue that the gun control laws interfere with
their second amendment rights provided in the constitution. The proponents of gun control laws
argue that close to 32,000 people die every year due to gun violence. The country has the highest
number of guns, and the problem comes from the owners for instance convicted felons or
domestic violence perpetrators. The opponents argue that the gun control measures have failed to
control the guns from getting to wrong persons. The resource will be used to support the
arguments and provide examples of some of the laws implemented by the former U.S presidents
to control gun ownership and how effective they have been. The resource will also be used to
support an argument on why there should be no more gun control laws.
Gun Control Overview. (2013). Congressional Digest, 92(3), 3.
The article discusses gun control and the debate surrounding the gun control laws. The
article presents questions that gun regulation policies have raised throughout the years. Some of
the arguments raised are whether the constitution allows for the restriction of guns. The other
issue is whether gun control equates crime control and whether strict gun control laws will
reduce homicide, assault, robbery, and attacks on public figures. The public also questions
EFFECTIVENESS OF GUN CONTROL REGULATIONS AS A METHOD TO REDUCE CRIME
3
whether the gun control restrictions will affect the practice of self-defense. The article states that
only federal laws have proven effective in managing guns and crime. States with minimal gun
control laws will be the highest sources of guns. The second amendment of the constitution is not
interfered with as the law was implemented to protect against the state militias. Some opponents
of gun control laws argue that crime is not associated with gun possession. This article shall be
used to inform the debate as it provides general facts on gun-related statistics including mortality
and crime statistics as it relates to gun control debate. It will also be used to illustrate some gun
regulations such as National Firearm Act, Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and Gun
Control Act of 1968.
Hsiao, T., & Bernstein, C. (2016). Against moderate gun control. Libertarian Papers, 8
Retrieved from https://login.libproxy.edmc.edu/login?url=https://search-proquestcom.libproxy.edmc.edu/docview/2001924933?accountid=34899
Hsiao & Bernstein (2016), presents arguments against gun control laws. Proponents of
gun ownership argue that it’s vital for self-defense while the opponents claim it increases social
harm. The article disputes measures on gun control proposed by another author David DeGrazia,
the moderate gun control. De Grazia argued that owning a gun is likely to cause harm as the
individual, the owner of the gun, has high chances of committing suicide or murder. De Grazia
states that only individuals who need self-protection and have undergone a handgun safety
training. Hsiao & Bernstein dispute De Grazia’s moderate gun control measures are stating that
the arguments are narrow and weak. The right-to-carry laws reduced the violent crime rates by
8% and sexual assault cases by 6% as people were prohibited from carrying their guns around.
EFFECTIVENESS OF GUN CONTROL REGULATIONS AS A METHOD TO REDUCE CRIME
4
The article is useful to the topic as it presents arguments that both proponents and opponents
against the gun control measures to minimize crime might use to support their control measures.
Kposowa, A. a., Hamilton, D., & Wang, K. (2016). Impact of Firearm Availability and Gun
Regulation on State Suicide Rates. Suicide & Life-Threatening Behavior, 46(6), 678-696.
This journal article evaluates the effect of firearm storage practices and the strictness of
firearm regulations on suicide rates in each state. Kposowa. Hamilton & Wang relate to gun
ownership to the suicide rates in families or households. The presence of guns in a home
increased the chances of suicide due to easy accessibility to the weapon. Kposowa et al. (2016)
state that over 800000 people across the world die from intentional self-harm. From the year
2005 to 2012, suicide was the tenth leading cause of death in the United States with 51% of the
deaths being a result of firearms. Kposowa et al. believe that restricting access to the lethal
objects is the most effective way to reduce the suicide and homicide rates. The research
discovered that the number of loaded and unlocked guns in households contribute to the increase
of crime in the United States. Therefore, gun ownership laws will minimize the incidences of
crime. This article shall be used to support the argument on the effectiveness of gun control
measures. The article will be useful in providing the varied rates of crimes in states showing its
relationship to different gun ownership and storage practices.
Lott, J. R. (2013). More guns, less crime: Understanding crime and gun control laws. University
of Chicago Press.
Lott discusses how crime and gun control laws relate. Since the book’s last edition in ten
years to present, more states have implemented the right-to-carry law, from sixteen to thirty-nine
EFFECTIVENESS OF GUN CONTROL REGULATIONS AS A METHOD TO REDUCE CRIME
5
states. The book analyzes the effects of the gun laws are first implemented and after the
elimination. For instance, the federal assaults weapon ban which was introduced in 1994 and
ended in 2004. The book further explores the relationship between gun laws, a number of arrests
and convictions, socioeconomic factors and demographic compositions as they relate to violent
and property crime. The book evaluates the effectiveness of gun laws such as Brady law, waiting
periods, first background checks among others. Lott believes that Brady law and background
checks had a long-lasting positive impact on crime rates. The law prevented the transfer of over
two million guns and managed to control gun violence. The arguments in this book for and
against gun control laws shall inform the research and be used to evaluate the effectiveness of
gun control laws as a measure to reduce crime rates. The book also provides general information
on gun control laws and crime that will be used to provide information on the research topic.
McGinty, E. E., Wolfson, J. A., Sell, T. K., & Webster, D. W. (2016). Common sense or gun
control? Political communication and news media framing of firearm sale background
checks after Newtown. Journal of health politics, policy, and law, 41(1), 3-40.
The 2012 mass shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, compelled the U.S government to
implement and enforce gun control policies. The shooting occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary
School and led to several deaths including twenty students and six staff. This article evaluates the
manner in which news media and political figures communicated the background checks for
firearms to relay the information. The news media used reliable and evidence-based facts to
present the information to the public. The proponents saw a way to make the laws more strict
after the 2012 shooting by implementing background checks and restricting mentally ill persons
from owning guns. The opponents campaigned for the laws to be loosened and allow for gun
EFFECTIVENESS OF GUN CONTROL REGULATIONS AS A METHOD TO REDUCE CRIME
6
owners to carry their guns to public places. This resource will be useful in informing some gun
control laws that were suggested and implemented after the mass attack. The article presents the
arguments by both proponents and opponents of the gun control laws and will be used to support
the research topic on gun control laws effectiveness. The article shall be used to show the
relationship between crime and gun control laws.
Vernick, J. S., Alcorn, T., & Horwitz, J. (2017). Background checks for all gun buyers and gun
violence restraining orders: state efforts to keep guns from high-risk persons. The Journal
of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 45(1_suppl), 98-102.
Vernick, Alcon & Howrwitz (2017), discuss the practice of conducting a criminal
background check on every person who buys a gun from a licensed dealer. The practice aims at
preventing the access of firearms to people that pose a danger to themselves or others. Most
prohibited offenders attempt to purchase guns from unlicensed online sellers where checks are
not required. Vernick et al., states that gun purchase laws significantly affect the rates of
violence. Majority of the deaths and crime in the U.S are associated with possession of a firearm.
There was a reduction of crime rates by 15.4% due to the permit-to-purchase law in Connecticut,
and when Missouri State rejected the law, there was a 16.1% increase in crime rates associated
with firearms. The resource will be used to show the different types of background checks
implemented in various states across the country to manage gun buyers and ownership by highrisk persons and their effectiveness in minimizing the rates of crime.
EFFECTIVENESS OF GUN CONTROL REGULATIONS AS A METHOD TO REDUCE CRIME
7
Unit IV Color Key:
Blue: APA document formatting
Red: Example common mistakes in APA style
Brown: Paragraph number and label
Green: Sentence-level number and explanation
Running head: SAFETY FIRST
1
APA header: Note that the
title is in capital letters and
prefaced by the words
“Running head.” The page
number is also included.
Full title of the paper with the
major words beginning with a
capital letter
Safety First: Open Carry Firearms on Higher Education Campuses in Arizona
Student Name
Columbia Southern University
Name of the institution,
which will always be
“Columbia Southern
University”
The student’s first and last
name
SAFETY FIRST
Para 1:
Introduction
Full title presented again at the top of
the page
2
Safety First: Open Carry Firearms on Higher Education Campuses in Arizona
S2 &3: Follows
S1 by
introducing the
position of the
pro side; again,
Amanda is
general,
focusing on the
larger
controversy
Much has been made in the past few years about gun restrictions in the U.S. Proponents
Sentence 1
(S1): Amanda
introduces the
main topic
(gun control) in
a generalized
manner; this
sentence also
introduces the
con side of the
controversy
S5: Specific
examples from
the news.
Note that
these are
examples of
school
shootings with
which most
people are
familiar. This
grounds the
project to what
is at stake in
making
arguments
about this
topic.
S7: In this
sentence, the
writer
introduces the
specific topic
of the project:
the
controversy
around
SB1474.
S10: Amanda
presents her
thesis
statement.
She responds
to the
controversy by
crafting a
thesis
statement that
simultaneousl
y agrees and
disagrees.
of gun regulation are in a constant state of lobbying for state and federal bills that restrict access
to firearms, whether that takes the form of more extensive background checks on potential gun
owners or longer waiting periods before guns may be sold to individuals. On the other side, the
National Rifle Association (NRA) and other like-minded individuals advocate for looser
restrictions on the sale and carrying of firearms. For these supporters of pro-gun legislation,
owning and carrying guns is a fundamental right—even a civil right. While this national debate
continues to loom over the hot topic of guns, there are breaking news stories, especially within
S4: Amanda
begins to narrow
the scope of the
project by pointing
towards a specific
debate within the
larger controversy
of gun control:
gun control in
educational
settings.
the last few months, that bring this fundamental debate to the threshold of our nations colleges,
high schools, even elementary schools. Seung-Hui Cho’s massacre at Virginia Tech (April 16,
2007) is perhaps one of the more infamous school shootings, but there are others that are perhaps
more difficult to remember, like the deaths of 27 killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School in
Newton, Connecticut (December 14, 2012) (CNN, 2015). Shootings like these in educational
settings have drawn attention from both anti-gun proponents and pro-gun lobbyists, and the State
S6: Amanda
again narrows
the scope of
the project by
moving from
gun control in
educational
settings to this
debate as it
takes place in a
specific
location:
Arizona.
of Arizona is no exception to this firestorm. The Arizona State legislature has proposed SB 1474,
a gun bill that will allow students and faculty to carry guns on the campus grounds of its three
state-funded universities. Supporters of the bill claim that Arizona is an open carry state, and
those rights should not be restricted simply because the carrier crosses the border of a college
campus. Those against the bill assert that guns have no place in education and that those who
support the bill are only after their own election-year agendas. While the Second Amendment
should be upheld, the educational learning environment should be protected;
S8 & 9:
Following the
same order
from above
(con first, then
pro), Amanda
presents the
sides of the
controversy by
introducing
each specific
position.
SAFETY FIRST
Shortened version of the title in the
header and the page number on each
page
3
therefore, SB 1474 is a detrimental and dangerous bill that has the potential to change the
university campus culture in Arizona state universities.
Para 2:
Preface of the
Literature
Review
This is a
second-level
heading. It is
left-hand
justified and
bold. All major
words are
capitalized.
This tells the
reader that
this next
section is a
division of the
first-level
heading that
is directly
above.
The Literature Review
First-level heading: All major sections of the paper will
be first-level, including The Literature Review, Body, and
Conclusion. You may choose to mark the Introduction,
but it is typically not done because the title of the paper
stands for the heading level. Note that the title is
centered and bold with sentence-case capitalization.
In order to better understanding the origins of SB1474 and the controversy that surrounds
it, the history of gun violence in school settings must be taken into account; therefore, a brief
look at some of the events of the past few decades is presented. Further, this review will examine
in greater detail the positions of the two sides of the controversy, beginning with the pro-SB1474
side, which is in favor of allowing open carry on all Arizona state-funded campuses. Then the
position of those against SB1474 will be presented; again, this con side is arguing for Arizona
campuses to remain as they are now: a place without firearms.
A Brief Look at Gun Violence in Schools
Para 3: Brief
History
Amanda has made a mistake: Only
the ampersand (&) should be used
in a parenthetical citation.
The topic of gun control in educational environments exploded in 1999 when Eric Harris
and Dylan Klebold walked into a virtually unknown high school in Littleton, CO, and killed
This citation is
in APA. It
shows the
authors and
year of
publication.
This sentence
is a
paraphrase of
Gibbs and
Roche. The
reader can
look at the
references
page to find
the original
document.
Note how
Amanda
prefaces the
LR by giving
the reader an
idea of what
will be
included. You
might also
note that the
paragraph is
written in
passive voice
so that she
can avoid
using
personal
pronouns
such as “I.”
twelve students and one teacher (Gibbs and Roche, 1999). Questions of how such events could
occur and concerns about the violence of which teens and young adults are capable became the
concern of pressured administrators and horrified parents in big cities and small towns alike. A
string of school gun-centered violence followed over the next few years. Perhaps most striking
though was the way in which this one incident changed the culture of America: clear backpacks,
more metal detectors, and (of course) fear. Cloud (1999) points out some of the extreme, “zero
tolerance” actions taken by schools shortly following the Columbine shootings:
A seven-year-old boy in Cahokia, Ill., is suspended for having a nail clipper at school. A
10th-grader at Surry County High School in Virginia is booted for having blue-dyed hair.
This quotation is called a “block.” If a quotation is over 40 words long, then you must “block” it by
removing the quotation marks and indenting the entire quotation 1/2” from the left-hand margin.
If this quotation would have been from a print text, then the page number would have been
included at the end of the sentence, but it was an electronic source.
Here is another
way to include a
parenthetical
citation. Amanda
has incorporated
the author’s name
into the sentence.
Note that the year
of publication is
presented after
the author, but
there is no citation
at the end of the
sentence because
the information is
already presented
at the beginning.
SAFETY FIRST
There are three second-level headings in the LR. Headings help you and the reader to see
the organization of your paper.
4
A Minnesota high school nixes a yearbook photo of an Army enlistee in the senior class
because it shows her sitting atop a cannon outside a Veterans of Foreign Wars post.
Far from the exception, these actions considered these many years later seem unreasonable, even
in a post-9/11 world filled with uncertainty.
The Argument for Open Carry Everywhere in Arizona
Para 4: Pro side
However, in Arizona, the newly proposed SB 1474 would not seek to disarm students; on
the contrary, the bill would allow students the right to concealed carry on state-funded university
Amanda
presents a
closer look at
the pro side
before the con
side. Note that
she is not
engaging with
the arguments,
only presenting
them as fairly
as she can.
The LR is
about the
arguments of
others. Amanda
knows she will
be able to
make her own
arguments in
the Body of the
paper.
campuses. Proponents of the bill assert that such a measure is long over due. According to an
NRA poster that were taped to message boards all over The University of Arizona campus,
“[s]elf-defense is one of the most fundamental rights of every human being.” Further, the poster
states that the NRA has worked diligently over the past 25 years to expand the right of open
carry: the NRA has been “working for passage of fair Right-to-Carry laws, expansion of carry
reciprocity between the states and the elimination of many ‘no-carry’ zones that only affect the
law-abiding.” For the NRA, one of the major private-public backers of the SB 1474, the
restriction of concealed carry on college campuses is an infringement on these basic rights. The
flyer goes on to state the following:
Those who oppose campus carry [of firearms] argue that educational institutions should
be treated differently, based on emotional claims that places of higher learning are
somehow exempt from real-world violence. But the truth is, despite current prohibitions
on legally carrying on campuses, crimes already occur on campus, and the right to selfdefense from those violent acts should be respected. (NRA, 2012)
The NRA is correct. In fact, given the number of school-related shootings in the past few months
alone, it would seem that a student’s chances of being shot on campus seem greater than if that
SAFETY FIRST
5
same student were walking the streets of the community. From larger cities to small towns, it
seems that the size of the community does not matter: the violence of a shooting can occur
anywhere. However, even with this fact floating in the backs of students’ minds, students must
still attend classes and while it would seem obvious that lawmakers on both sides want student
safety, they just see the means to that safety from different sides of the same coin.
The Case for Campuses as Unique
Para 5: Con side
This citation is correct. Amanda did not have to include the
author’s first name, but it is fine to do so the first time that
the author’s name is mentioned.
Eugene Sander (2012), the Interim President of the University of Arizona, released the
following statement about SB 1474: “I have been a gun owner for all my adult life, and am fully
supportive of the right to own a gun. However, having faculty, staff or students bringing
weapons into classrooms and other campus activities will do nothing to make our campus safer.”
Amanda
has made a
mistake.
Each time
an author is
included,
the year of
publication
must
follow. So
this should
read as
follows:
“While
Sander
(2012)…”
While Sander does not go into detail about what this newly proposed bill does have to do with,
he makes his case on the basis that 50,000 students, staff, and faculty attend the campus daily,
along with over 20,000 visitors annually. For Sander (2015), the educational environment is a
“unique atmosphere that is dependent on open and vigorous debate. Introducing guns into
Amanda
has made a
mistake.
The actual
year of the
publication
is 2012. Be
careful
about
editing for
errors like
this in your
own paper.
classrooms would dramatically and negatively impact the ability to engage in constructive
dialogue.” In other words, even if the NRA does not believe that the university is a unique
atmosphere, as Sander and others do, then there is still a possibility that introducing the right to
carry concealed weapons on campus might lead to a change to the very culture of the university.
Para 6: LR
Conclusion
While Arizona lawmakers continue to debate the merits of SB1474, the public debate
grows, as this issue concerns both public safety and citizens’ rights. Because the three state
S1&2:
Amanda
creates a topic
sentence that
encapsulates
the concern of
the
controversy,
and she
includes a
second
sentence to
increase
understanding.
universities in Arizona are publically funded, the debate about allowing open carry is very much
a concern held by the communities in which these universities reside. Those who are in favor of
the change to an open carry status on university campuses wish (a) for the open carry laws of the
S3: Amanda
summarizes
the two main
arguments of
the pro side,
which favors
the passing of
SB1474.
S4: Amanda
summarizes
the main
argument of
the con side,
those who are
against the
passing of
SB1474.
SAFETY FIRST
6
State of Arizona to be extended to all areas, which includes all publically funding institutions,
such as the universities, and (b) for the open carry of firearms to act as a deterrent to gun-related
violence on college campuses. For those who are against the passing of SB1474, many of whom
occupy the space of the university as professors, students, or administrators, the question of
allowing the open carry of firearms is no actual question at all: there is simply no need to involve
weapons in a space that is meant for open dialogue and debate. In as much as the Second
Amendment should be observed and upheld in the fashion adopted by the State of Arizona in the
form of open carry, the university setting is unique in that concerns about open and free
expression should be at the forefront—essentially making this bill a potentially dangerous one
that should be reconsidered or withdrawn completely.
S5: Amanda
reiterates her
own position
by reasserting
her thesis
statement.
Note that the
thesis
statement is
slightly
different than
the original at
the end of the
Introduction
paragraph.
SAFETY FIRST
An APA list of references should be
labeled “References,” NOT “Works
Cited” or “Bibliography.”
The last
name is
presented
first; then the
first name
and middle
(if present) is
included as
initials. An
ampersand
(&) is used
for more
than one
author. Last
names are
always
presented
first.
7
Titles in APA are presented in sentence-case
capitalization, meaning that only the first
word or any proper noun should begin with a
capital letter.
References
CNN Library. (2015, October 19). 28 deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history fast facts. CNN.
Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/16/us/20-deadliest-mass-shootings-in-u-s-
Proper nouns
always begin
with a capital
letter.
history-fast-facts/
Cloud, J. (1999). The Columbine effect. Time. Retrieved from http://content.time.com/time/
magazine/article/0,9171,35098,00.html
Gibbs, N. & Roche, T. (1999). The Columbine tapes. Time. Retrieved from
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,992873,00.html
National Rifle Association. (2012). Arizona self-Defense on campus [Flyer]. NRA: Author.
Sander, Eugene. (2012, March 20). UA President opposes campus guns bill. KGUN-TV.
Amanda has
made a
mistake by
including the
full name of
the author
here.
Retrieved from http://www.kgun9.com
Amanda has
made a
mistake. This
capital letter
“D” should not
be capitalized.
RUNNING HEAD: EFFECTIVENESS OF GUN CONTROL REGULATIONS AS A
METHOD TO REDUCE CRIME
Effectiveness of Gun control regulations as a method to reduce crime
Student’s name:
Columbia Southern University
1
EFFECTIVENESS OF GUN CONTROL REGULATIONS AS A METHOD TO REDUCE CRIME
2
Effectiveness of Gun control regulations as a method to reduce crime
The Topic
The U.S has the highest number of guns across the world with the number being
approximately 400 billion. More than 22% of the population own guns, with close to 35% male
and 12% female owners Gun deaths are ranked twelfth under causes of death (Everitt & Pratt,
2015). For several years debates have been held to question and determine the effectiveness of
gun control measures in minimizing crime. People have explained on the advantages of the gun
control laws such as background checks and the disadvantages in an attempt to reduce the rates
of crime in American states. Gun control laws in the past and present years include National
Firearm Act, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and the Gun Control Act of 1968.
Storage practices have equally been associated with the increase in crime related to firearms.
Controversy
The effectiveness of gun control laws as a method of minimizing crime has been an ongoing concern for many in the united states both lawmakers and citizens (Vernick, Alcon &
Howrwitz, 2017). Many people do not agree that gun control laws impact the rate of crime in
society. However, there are some who believe the laws are the most efficient way to manage the
increasing rates of crime resulting from firearms. The effectiveness of the gun control measures
has been seen in several states such as Connecticut and others continue to formulate and
implement the laws. However, the question remains the necessity and effectiveness of the gun
control laws.
EFFECTIVENESS OF GUN CONTROL REGULATIONS AS A METHOD TO REDUCE CRIME
3
Pro side of the controversy
Proponents of gun control laws as a measure to minimize the crime state that guns that
are owned legally by people are often stolen by criminals and used to commit a crime. Poor
storage of the firearms contributes to them being taken and used. According to government
statistics, 1.4 million guns were stolen from homes during the year 2005 and 2010. Implementing
mandatory gun safety features will minimize the rate of accidental deaths from firearms (Lott,
2013). Kposowa. Hamilton & Wang (2016) discovered that the presence of unlocked and loaded
guns in a home increased the number of suicide attempts. The proponents argue that gun control
laws reduce the risk of suicide. Kposowa et al. (2016), state that firearms cause 51% of suicide
deaths in the U.S. The proponents argue that civilians that are armed would not provide safety
and protection instead likely to commit crimes such as mass shootings. According to McGinty,
Wolfson, Sell & Webster (2016), the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary school which
was a failure by the government to ensure the gun did not reach a high-risk individual, the
attacker.
Con side of the Controversy
Several individuals have opposed the gun control laws as they interfere with the second
amendment right of American citizens to own guns (Gun Control Overview, 2013). The
constitution allows citizens to own guns for reasons such as self-defense. Therefore, gun control
laws hinder the people’s right to own guns which denies them the feeling of safety and right to
life (Everitt & Pratt, 2015). The police are not able to protect everyone, only the right people
with guns can stop the violent ones with guns. The opponents argue that gun control laws are
EFFECTIVENESS OF GUN CONTROL REGULATIONS AS A METHOD TO REDUCE CRIME
4
ineffective. A study showed that nine out of the twenty-five states that implemented gun control
laws increased the gun death rates (Kalesan, Mobily, Keiser, Fagan & Galea, 2016).
Tentative Thesis Statement
Gun control laws are effective ways to reduce crime because limiting the number of guns
through regulation of ownership, implementation of safety practices and bans will keep the
firearms away from high-risk individuals thus reduce the probability of committing a crime.
EFFECTIVENESS OF GUN CONTROL REGULATIONS AS A METHOD TO REDUCE CRIME
5
References
Everitt, L., & Pratt, E. (2015). Does the U.S. Need Tougher Gun-Control Laws?. New York
Times Upfront, 147(12), 22-23.
Gun Control Overview. (2013). Congressional Digest, 92(3), 3.
Kalesan, B., Mobily, M. E., Keiser, O., Fagan, J. A., & Galea, S. (2016). Firearm legislation and
firearm mortality in the USA: a cross-sectional, state-level study. The
Lancet, 387(10030), 1847-1855.
Kposowa, A. a., Hamilton, D., & Wang, K. (2016). Impact of Firearm Availability and Gun
Regulation on State Suicide Rates. Suicide & Life-Threatening Behavior, 46(6), 678-696.
Lott, J. R. (2013). More guns, less crime: Understanding crime and gun control laws. University
of Chicago Press.
McGinty, E. E., Wolfson, J. A., Sell, T. K., & Webster, D. W. (2016). Common sense or gun
control? Political communication and news media framing of firearm sale background
checks after Newtown. Journal of health politics, policy, and law, 41(1), 3-40.
Vernick, J. S., Alcorn, T., & Horwitz, J. (2017). Background checks for all gun buyers and gun
violence restraining orders: state efforts to keep guns from high-risk persons. The Journal
of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 45(1_suppl), 98-102.
Unit IV Color Key:
Blue: APA document formatting
Red: Example common mistakes in APA style
Brown: Paragraph number and label
Green: Sentence-level number and explanation
Running head: SAFETY FIRST
1
APA header: Note that the
title is in capital letters and
prefaced by the words
“Running head.” The page
number is also included.
Full title of the paper with the
major words beginning with a
capital letter
Safety First: Open Carry Firearms on Higher Education Campuses in Arizona
Student Name
Columbia Southern University
Name of the institution,
which will always be
“Columbia Southern
University”
The student’s first and last
name
SAFETY FIRST
Para 1:
Introduction
Full title presented again at the top of
the page
2
Safety First: Open Carry Firearms on Higher Education Campuses in Arizona
S2 &3: Follows
S1 by
introducing the
position of the
pro side; again,
Amanda is
general,
focusing on the
larger
controversy
Much has been made in the past few years about gun restrictions in the U.S. Proponents
Sentence 1
(S1): Amanda
introduces the
main topic
(gun control) in
a generalized
manner; this
sentence also
introduces the
con side of the
controversy
S5: Specific
examples from
the news.
Note that
these are
examples of
school
shootings with
which most
people are
familiar. This
grounds the
project to what
is at stake in
making
arguments
about this
topic.
S7: In this
sentence, the
writer
introduces the
specific topic
of the project:
the
controversy
around
SB1474.
S10: Amanda
presents her
thesis
statement.
She responds
to the
controversy by
crafting a
thesis
statement that
simultaneousl
y agrees and
disagrees.
of gun regulation are in a constant state of lobbying for state and federal bills that restrict access
to firearms, whether that takes the form of more extensive background checks on potential gun
owners or longer waiting periods before guns may be sold to individuals. On the other side, the
National Rifle Association (NRA) and other like-minded individuals advocate for looser
restrictions on the sale and carrying of firearms. For these supporters of pro-gun legislation,
owning and carrying guns is a fundamental right—even a civil right. While this national debate
continues to loom over the hot topic of guns, there are breaking news stories, especially within
S4: Amanda
begins to narrow
the scope of the
project by pointing
towards a specific
debate within the
larger controversy
of gun control:
gun control in
educational
settings.
the last few months, that bring this fundamental debate to the threshold of our nations colleges,
high schools, even elementary schools. Seung-Hui Cho’s massacre at Virginia Tech (April 16,
2007) is perhaps one of the more infamous school shootings, but there are others that are perhaps
more difficult to remember, like the deaths of 27 killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School in
Newton, Connecticut (December 14, 2012) (CNN, 2015). Shootings like these in educational
settings have drawn attention from both anti-gun proponents and pro-gun lobbyists, and the State
S6: Amanda
again narrows
the scope of
the project by
moving from
gun control in
educational
settings to this
debate as it
takes place in a
specific
location:
Arizona.
of Arizona is no exception to this firestorm. The Arizona State legislature has proposed SB 1474,
a gun bill that will allow students and faculty to carry guns on the campus grounds of its three
state-funded universities. Supporters of the bill claim that Arizona is an open carry state, and
those rights should not be restricted simply because the carrier crosses the border of a college
campus. Those against the bill assert that guns have no place in education and that those who
support the bill are only after their own election-year agendas. While the Second Amendment
should be upheld, the educational learning environment should be protected;
S8 & 9:
Following the
same order
from above
(con first, then
pro), Amanda
presents the
sides of the
controversy by
introducing
each specific
position.
SAFETY FIRST
Shortened version of the title in the
header and the page number on each
page
3
therefore, SB 1474 is a detrimental and dangerous bill that has the potential to change the
university campus culture in Arizona state universities.
Para 2:
Preface of the
Literature
Review
This is a
second-level
heading. It is
left-hand
justified and
bold. All major
words are
capitalized.
This tells the
reader that
this next
section is a
division of the
first-level
heading that
is directly
above.
The Literature Review
First-level heading: All major sections of the paper will
be first-level, including The Literature Review, Body, and
Conclusion. You may choose to mark the Introduction,
but it is typically not done because the title of the paper
stands for the heading level. Note that the title is
centered and bold with sentence-case capitalization.
In order to better understanding the origins of SB1474 and the controversy that surrounds
it, the history of gun violence in school settings must be taken into account; therefore, a brief
look at some of the events of the past few decades is presented. Further, this review will examine
in greater detail the positions of the two sides of the controversy, beginning with the pro-SB1474
side, which is in favor of allowing open carry on all Arizona state-funded campuses. Then the
position of those against SB1474 will be presented; again, this con side is arguing for Arizona
campuses to remain as they are now: a place without firearms.
A Brief Look at Gun Violence in Schools
Para 3: Brief
History
Amanda has made a mistake: Only
the ampersand (&) should be used
in a parenthetical citation.
The topic of gun control in educational environments exploded in 1999 when Eric Harris
and Dylan Klebold walked into a virtually unknown high school in Littleton, CO, and killed
This citation is
in APA. It
shows the
authors and
year of
publication.
This sentence
is a
paraphrase of
Gibbs and
Roche. The
reader can
look at the
references
page to find
the original
document.
Note how
Amanda
prefaces the
LR by giving
the reader an
idea of what
will be
included. You
might also
note that the
paragraph is
written in
passive voice
so that she
can avoid
using
personal
pronouns
such as “I.”
twelve students and one teacher (Gibbs and Roche, 1999). Questions of how such events could
occur and concerns about the violence of which teens and young adults are capable became the
concern of pressured administrators and horrified parents in big cities and small towns alike. A
string of school gun-centered violence followed over the next few years. Perhaps most striking
though was the way in which this one incident changed the culture of America: clear backpacks,
more metal detectors, and (of course) fear. Cloud (1999) points out some of the extreme, “zero
tolerance” actions taken by schools shortly following the Columbine shootings:
A seven-year-old boy in Cahokia, Ill., is suspended for having a nail clipper at school. A
10th-grader at Surry County High School in Virginia is booted for having blue-dyed hair.
This quotation is called a “block.” If a quotation is over 40 words long, then you must “block” it by
removing the quotation marks and indenting the entire quotation 1/2” from the left-hand margin.
If this quotation would have been from a print text, then the page number would have been
included at the end of the sentence, but it was an electronic source.
Here is another
way to include a
parenthetical
citation. Amanda
has incorporated
the author’s name
into the sentence.
Note that the year
of publication is
presented after
the author, but
there is no citation
at the end of the
sentence because
the information is
already presented
at the beginning.
SAFETY FIRST
There are three second-level headings in the LR. Headings help you and the reader to see
the organization of your paper.
4
A Minnesota high school nixes a yearbook photo of an Army enlistee in the senior class
because it shows her sitting atop a cannon outside a Veterans of Foreign Wars post.
Far from the exception, these actions considered these many years later seem unreasonable, even
in a post-9/11 world filled with uncertainty.
The Argument for Open Carry Everywhere in Arizona
Para 4: Pro side
However, in Arizona, the newly proposed SB 1474 would not seek to disarm students; on
the contrary, the bill would allow students the right to concealed carry on state-funded university
Amanda
presents a
closer look at
the pro side
before the con
side. Note that
she is not
engaging with
the arguments,
only presenting
them as fairly
as she can.
The LR is
about the
arguments of
others. Amanda
knows she will
be able to
make her own
arguments in
the Body of the
paper.
campuses. Proponents of the bill assert that such a measure is long over due. According to an
NRA poster that were taped to message boards all over The University of Arizona campus,
“[s]elf-defense is one of the most fundamental rights of every human being.” Further, the poster
states that the NRA has worked diligently over the past 25 years to expand the right of open
carry: the NRA has been “working for passage of fair Right-to-Carry laws, expansion of carry
reciprocity between the states and the elimination of many ‘no-carry’ zones that only affect the
law-abiding.” For the NRA, one of the major private-public backers of the SB 1474, the
restriction of concealed carry on college campuses is an infringement on these basic rights. The
flyer goes on to state the following:
Those who oppose campus carry [of firearms] argue that educational institutions should
be treated differently, based on emotional claims that places of higher learning are
somehow exempt from real-world violence. But the truth is, despite current prohibitions
on legally carrying on campuses, crimes already occur on campus, and the right to selfdefense from those violent acts should be respected. (NRA, 2012)
The NRA is correct. In fact, given the number of school-related shootings in the past few months
alone, it would seem that a student’s chances of being shot on campus seem greater than if that
SAFETY FIRST
5
same student were walking the streets of the community. From larger cities to small towns, it
seems that the size of the community does not matter: the violence of a shooting can occur
anywhere. However, even with this fact floating in the backs of students’ minds, students must
still attend classes and while it would seem obvious that lawmakers on both sides want student
safety, they just see the means to that safety from different sides of the same coin.
The Case for Campuses as Unique
Para 5: Con side
This citation is correct. Amanda did not have to include the
author’s first name, but it is fine to do so the first time that
the author’s name is mentioned.
Eugene Sander (2012), the Interim President of the University of Arizona, released the
following statement about SB 1474: “I have been a gun owner for all my adult life, and am fully
supportive of the right to own a gun. However, having faculty, staff or students bringing
weapons into classrooms and other campus activities will do nothing to make our campus safer.”
Amanda
has made a
mistake.
Each time
an author is
included,
the year of
publication
must
follow. So
this should
read as
follows:
“While
Sander
(2012)…”
While Sander does not go into detail about what this newly proposed bill does have to do with,
he makes his case on the basis that 50,000 students, staff, and faculty attend the campus daily,
along with over 20,000 visitors annually. For Sander (2015), the educational environment is a
“unique atmosphere that is dependent on open and vigorous debate. Introducing guns into
Amanda
has made a
mistake.
The actual
year of the
publication
is 2012. Be
careful
about
editing for
errors like
this in your
own paper.
classrooms would dramatically and negatively impact the ability to engage in constructive
dialogue.” In other words, even if the NRA does not believe that the university is a unique
atmosphere, as Sander and others do, then there is still a possibility that introducing the right to
carry concealed weapons on campus might lead to a change to the very culture of the university.
Para 6: LR
Conclusion
While Arizona lawmakers continue to debate the merits of SB1474, the public debate
grows, as this issue concerns both public safety and citizens’ rights. Because the three state
S1&2:
Amanda
creates a topic
sentence that
encapsulates
the concern of
the
controversy,
and she
includes a
second
sentence to
increase
understanding.
universities in Arizona are publically funded, the debate about allowing open carry is very much
a concern held by the communities in which these universities reside. Those who are in favor of
the change to an open carry status on university campuses wish (a) for the open carry laws of the
S3: Amanda
summarizes
the two main
arguments of
the pro side,
which favors
the passing of
SB1474.
S4: Amanda
summarizes
the main
argument of
the con side,
those who are
against the
passing of
SB1474.
SAFETY FIRST
6
State of Arizona to be extended to all areas, which includes all publically funding institutions,
such as the universities, and (b) for the open carry of firearms to act as a deterrent to gun-related
violence on college campuses. For those who are against the passing of SB1474, many of whom
occupy the space of the university as professors, students, or administrators, the question of
allowing the open carry of firearms is no actual question at all: there is simply no need to involve
weapons in a space that is meant for open dialogue and debate. In as much as the Second
Amendment should be observed and upheld in the fashion adopted by the State of Arizona in the
form of open carry, the university setting is unique in that concerns about open and free
expression should be at the forefront—essentially making this bill a potentially dangerous one
that should be reconsidered or withdrawn completely.
S5: Amanda
reiterates her
own position
by reasserting
her thesis
statement.
Note that the
thesis
statement is
slightly
different than
the original at
the end of the
Introduction
paragraph.
SAFETY FIRST
An APA list of references should be
labeled “References,” NOT “Works
Cited” or “Bibliography.”
The last
name is
presented
first; then the
first name
and middle
(if present) is
included as
initials. An
ampersand
(&) is used
for more
than one
author. Last
names are
always
presented
first.
7
Titles in APA are presented in sentence-case
capitalization, meaning that only the first
word or any proper noun should begin with a
capital letter.
References
CNN Library. (2015, October 19). 28 deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history fast facts. CNN.
Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/16/us/20-deadliest-mass-shootings-in-u-s-
Proper nouns
always begin
with a capital
letter.
history-fast-facts/
Cloud, J. (1999). The Columbine effect. Time. Retrieved from http://content.time.com/time/
magazine/article/0,9171,35098,00.html
Gibbs, N. & Roche, T. (1999). The Columbine tapes. Time. Retrieved from
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,992873,00.html
National Rifle Association. (2012). Arizona self-Defense on campus [Flyer]. NRA: Author.
Sander, Eugene. (2012, March 20). UA President opposes campus guns bill. KGUN-TV.
Amanda has
made a
mistake by
including the
full name of
the author
here.
Retrieved from http://www.kgun9.com
Amanda has
made a
mistake. This
capital letter
“D” should not
be capitalized.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment