Violence In America..Will It Ever End? Essay Example

of sports and religion in promoting violence,
pacifism,
and international violence.
This paper aims to comprehensively explore each of these aspects while also expressing personal opinions and presenting factual information.
In order to establish my standpoint effectively, it is necessary to define violence, aggressiveness, and assertiveness, as well as clarify the distinctions between them.

Sociologists have thoroughly analyzed twelve key factors related to violence. These include subjects like spanking, child abuse, spouse abuse, punishment for offenders,
gun control,
media's impact on violence,
the role of sports and religion in encouraging violence,
pacifism,
and international violence. The objective of this paper is to extensively examine each of these aspects while also sharing personal perspectives and providing factual data. To effectively establish my viewpoint, it is essential to define violence, aggressiveness, and assertiveness while highlighting their differences.Violence encompasses a range of harmful actions towards others, including hitting, punching, biting, killing, stabbing, shoving, and more. It is closely related to aggression and assertiveness. Aggression refers to forceful hostile or destructive acts associated with dominance, while assertiveness involves expressing opinions without physical force. Although these terms have distinct meanings, they are interconnected. When someone who is being assertive fails to achieve their desired outcome or effectively communicate their point of view, they often become aggressive. This progression from assertiveness to aggression frequently leads to violent behavior. As a result, violence has become prevalent in society today. Many newspapers extensively cover ongoing violence and the continuous calls for its cessation. Various significant global events like Columbine, the Oklahoma City bombing, Jonesboro incidents involving gang violence and racially motivated incidents at Champlin Park last year all demonstrate forms of violent reactions that continue to occur regularly.Television exposes us to a significant

amount of violence, aggression, and assertiveness in cartoons, sitcoms, and news broadcasts. The frequency of this exposure is increasing day by day, often unnoticed by people. Examples include watching wrestling or sports on TV. Society seems to view violence as something ordinary - the act of someone being murdered is no longer headline news; it takes a juvenile shooting eight classmates for people to pay attention. Individuals have become desensitized to hearing about others losing control and resorting to aggression. Violence, aggression, and assertiveness have become commonplace in daily life. These behaviors are learned at a young age and persist throughout an individual's life (article 18). Just as parents teach children manners and consideration for others like saying "please" and "thank you," they can also teach them violence. Parents hold great influence over their children's lives - not only do children look up to them and admire them but they also aspire to be like them. If a child witnesses their role model engaging in violent behavior, they begin to believe it is acceptable for them too. Continuous exposure to violence eventually leads individuals to adopt violent behavior. Society also contributes to teaching violence.Males, particularly, face immense pressure to constantly prove themselves in our society. Many forms of education, including television and film fiction, perpetuate the belief that if males cannot achieve their desires or if life treats them unfairly, they should seek retribution by inflicting harm on others. This message is conveyed through various media outlets like television, music, and other aspects that form an integral part of a child's life.

Sometimes our larger culture is the source of our defeat. American society is remarkable

for its competitive nature, autonomy, and independence. However, this can often lead to self-centered aggression which supports my claim that society also promotes violence.

For example, children who watch violent TV programs begin to see violence as acceptable. There are many children's shows centered around violence like X-Men, Superman, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and numerous others. Violence promotion has also intensified in the world of music. Over the past five years alone, the number of CDs with explicit lyrics warnings has likely tripled. Song lyrics have become increasingly explicit and frequently depict actions such as shooting someone or assaulting a police officer.The lack of content in a song can diminish its appeal, as evidenced by an example from article 16. This example highlights society's role in teaching violence and suggests that people's actions are influenced by their cultural upbringing. For instance, if a child witnesses a hero on television resorting to violence against a villain, they may perceive such behavior as acceptable. Consequently, this child might physically assault another student at school out of anger. I believe that social isolation and an antisocial lifestyle are the root causes of violence. Goldstein argues that antisocial behavior, including violence, is not innate but learned (article 1). To prevent exclusion and foster necessary interpersonal skills, it is crucial to promote socialization and develop relationships from an early age. A significant aspect of shaping a child's behavior lies in how parents choose to discipline them. The way parents administer punishment greatly influences their children's future outcomes. Therefore, caution must be exercised when determining appropriate consequences for youngsters. In my personal opinion, when a child misbehaves, they should be required to

engage in a conversation discussing what happened, why it occurred, and what kind of punishment they believe is justified.This method may be difficult for a child as they typically prefer quick timeouts or losing a toy as punishment. In article 1, an alternative approach to discipline is discussed where families avoid traditional methods and instead have conversations with their children. Some view this approach as harsh. Dianne, one of the parents, stresses the importance of communication, saying, "We value talking." Interestingly, their children sometimes express a preference for physical punishment over talking, stating, "Hit me. Just don't make me talk about it." Regarding spanking, Dianne strongly believes that parents should never resort to this form of discipline. She considers it child abuse because it involves physically striking and lacking affection towards the child. Research shows that spanking can harm a child's development in the long run, impede their learning process, and increase their likelihood of engaging in destructive behavior and aggression (article 2). If parents were aware of these negative consequences, they would likely discontinue using spanking as punishment. Therefore, it is crucial to offer more support and education for both parents and those who work with children.Furthermore, it is hypocritical for parents to physically discipline their children through spanking, particularly considering that surveys demonstrate a significant percentage of individuals oppose this practice and view it as an act of abuse (article 4). This contradictory behavior sends mixed messages to children, urging them not to hit others while resorting to physical punishment themselves. Consequently, these conflicting signals only serve to confuse and harm the child. In my personal perspective, any undesired physical action that inflicts

harm upon a victim falls under my definition of child abuse.

Unfortunately, society appears to have grown more accepting of such mistreatment towards children by labeling it as "tough love" when a father mercilessly beats his child for stealing just one dollar. Additionally, society has begun turning a blind eye towards instances of child abuse by adopting the mentality that it is not their responsibility to address. Ideally, if I were ever witness to a parent striking their child, I would hope I possess the courage necessary to report the situation promptly to the appropriate authorities.

If individuals genuinely care about the well-being of children and how they are raised by their parents or guardians, they should cease disregarding cases in which excessive punishment goes beyond reasonable discipline. Once an individual has been proven guilty of committing child abuse, they ought to be compelled to attend parenting classes, undergo anger management courses, and undergo psychological evaluation with the purpose of comprehending the motivations behind their reliance on such harsh punishment methods while also learning alternative approaches.It is essential for abuse victims to seek therapy to address emotional scars and prevent perpetuating the cycle of abuse. The American family has a high injury rate, ranking second only to the military during war time (*see article 16). This statistic emphasizes that spouse abuse is a more significant issue than commonly believed, with approximately 25% of partners involved in violent acts (*see article 9). To effectively address this problem, stricter enforcement and punishment for abusers are necessary. Merely placing them in jail overnight or mandating a temporary stay in a hotel will only offer temporary solutions. I agree with article

7-A that jail time alone will not yield substantial results. Therefore, it is crucial to take more stringent measures against abusers, such as longer periods of incarceration and mandatory counseling. These actions aim to reduce violence within relationships by helping abusers recognize their problematic behavior and take steps towards addressing it. Regardless of the stage of development in a relationship, any unwanted physical contact placed upon another individual constitutes abuse.Leaving an abusive relationship is a difficult task for women, as expressed in article 17-A where 50% of individuals admitted their dependence on their partner. The reason behind this reliance is the love and happiness they experience when their partner is not abusive, which compensates for the suffering they endure. This dynamic is commonly seen on talk shows, where women choose to remain in abusive relationships due to their affection for their partner, having children together, or finding solace during moments of non-abuse. Article 9 emphasizes that the fear of loneliness or losing societal status associated with a stable relationship often prevents individuals from leaving the abusive situation. Moreover, women tend to view aggression as a form of affection, as discussed in article 9. The idea that abuse can be seen as an expression of love was also revealed, with nearly 30% of couples considering violence as a normal and even beneficial aspect of a romantic relationship. Surprisingly, three-quarters of those who experienced assault claimed it did not harm their relationship, and more than one-third believed that physical altercations actually strengthened their bond.The longer a woman remains in an abusive relationship, the harder it becomes for her to leave. Initially, when they are just dating, ending

things may not be as challenging since there is no strong emotional bond yet. However, as their relationship deepens and love grows, leaving would mean enduring more emotional pain. As they become closer, she gets to know him fully. The next stages of their relationship are engagement and marriage. Despite experiencing abuse during courtship, many couples still proceed with marriage plans, making it incredibly difficult for the woman to leave. At this point, her life revolves around him and she may hold on to hope that he will change. Society often blames the abuser's upbringing - statistics show that one in ten husbands who grew up in violent families become wife beaters compared to one in thirty from nonviolent households. When a child witnesses their father abusing their mother while growing up, they may see such behavior as normal within marriage. Additionally, I believe men beating their partners stems from a struggle for power and a perceived need to dominate their wives.
Dealing with domestic abuse is a difficult task, even for the police. They face criticism for both getting involved in family disputes and failing to adequately protect victims. Currently, the police use three methods to handle domestic violence: mediating the altercation, separating the couple, or apprehending the suspect (article 8). Unfortunately, none of these approaches seem to be effective. To address this issue, it is crucial to educate individuals about their roles in dating from a young age. At present, boys are taught to initiate dates while girls are expected to accept and be submissive (article 10). Girls are not encouraged to take charge or exercise control. Conversely, boys learn assertiveness by asking for

dates, choosing activities, paying expenses, and driving. By eliminating these stereotypes and implementing stricter punishments for abusers, as well as educating women about the dangers of abuse, we could potentially reduce domestic and spousal abuse. With the exception of murder, non-consensual or forced sexual activity (rape) is considered an extremely heinous crime that is horrifying and morally wrong on various levels.The statistics on rape are astonishing and surprisingly alarming. Approximately 50-60% of men admitted that they would consider forcing a woman into sexual acts in certain circumstances. In a survey, men were asked to rate the likelihood of raping a woman on a scale of one to five, assuming absolute secrecy or no negative consequences. Around 5-7% of college men have confessed to actions that could be seen as rape, while women claim to have been victimized at higher rates. This difference may be due in part to men not recognizing mild physical force or psychological manipulation as sexual aggression.

Shockingly, a rape occurs every seven minutes in the United States, resulting in over one million rapes annually. The underreporting of rape cases worsens the severity of this crime. Victims often feel overwhelming guilt and shame, sometimes blaming themselves for the incident or thinking that going on a date implies consent for sexual activity. Moreover, if coercion and threats rather than physical violence were used by the perpetrator, victims may feel inadequate for not resisting more forcefully.

Rape victims frequently blame themselves for not foreseeing or preventing the assault. Counselors stress that these emotions can present significant obstacles to recovering from such experiences (Information from articles 12 and 15).It is important to acknowledge that the violation was

beyond your control and shift the blame onto the assailant (article 15). Proving guilt in rape cases can be difficult as there is a fine line between rape and consensual sex when it comes to evidence. Medical examiners struggle to determine if force was used unless visible physical signs like bruises are present. The presence of sperm alone is insufficient evidence to confirm rape. Creating a more supportive environment for women to report rape and imposing stricter punishments on perpetrators are crucial. In my opinion, life imprisonment without bail or appeals would be appropriate. To aid in the conviction process, technologies such as lie detector tests could be utilized. While death penalty is occasionally used for rape and murder, I find the creation of electric chairs, lethal injection machines, and similar devices highly imprudent. What were these inventors thinking? Did they genuinely believe these methods would be effective? Did they ever consider the saying "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" or that two wrongs don't make a right? What purpose does the death penalty serve? There isn't one! It has not reduced crime rates in America. Giving criminals the death penalty often provides them an easy way out, contradicting our aim to punish them in many cases.Instead, I believe it would be more difficult to confine convicted sex offenders and murderers in a prison cell with limited contact with loved ones, no television access, restricted outdoor time, and demanding labor. These individuals should receive a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole or appealing in a maximum security facility. It is outrageous that many criminals are released from prison

before completing their 15-year sentences. This leniency towards criminals hinders significant changes in America's level of violence. Rather than wasting resources on convict execution, we should focus on rehabilitating them and administering real punishment by sentencing them to lifetime incarceration.

My stance on the death penalty aligns with my views on other life and death matters such as abortion and euthanasia; I am completely against them. One reason behind my opposition to abortion is the availability of adoption, which grants numerous people the opportunity to fulfill their lifelong dreams of having children. When we allow a woman to terminate her own flesh and blood, we disregard the hopes and dreams of thousands. The responsibility for involvement with a man lies with those seeking an abortion; they had the chance to take precautions but chose not to do so. Now it is both the man and woman's duty to let the child live.They are responsible for the child's well-being throughout the pregnancy period, regardless of whether they desire it. I am opposed to abortion, even in cases of rape. Similarly, a woman who does not want a child has the option to give up her child. Furthermore, I am against doctor assisted suicide as it is considered equivalent to murder when a doctor agrees to withdraw life support or prescribe lethal drugs. All three of these matters concerning life and death should be illegal.

Implementing stricter regulations on obtaining firearms would also make it more challenging to commit murder. Hand guns, specifically, should be prohibited except for law enforcement and military personnel. According to Article 24*, statistics indicate that approximately 40,000 deaths occur annually in the United States

due to firearms, with handguns being responsible for most fatalities. Accidental firearm deaths account for over 1,600 instances. Nonfatal injuries resulting from hand gun accidents are four to six times higher in number. In terms of causing deaths, guns rank as the second most lethal consumer product after cars. Some states have already surpassed motor vehicle-related death rates with firearm-related deaths.

The article highlights that owning guns increases the risk of homicide among teenagers and young adults by over three times. It also reveals that accessibility to firearms raises the likelihood of successful suicide attempts by more than tenfold, making suicide more likely to be accomplished.
Handguns are responsible for approximately 19,000 suicides per year nationwide, with young people aged 10 to 19 accounting for over 1,400 of these cases. To ensure national safety, the prohibition of handguns is necessary. Additionally, research suggests that playing with toy guns can lead to aggression and anti-social behavior such as physical altercations, property damage, and threats. Such behavior during childhood can contribute to future violence. Providing children with toy guns sets them up for difficulties in their future relationships and a potentially violent lifestyle. Parents should avoid exposing their children to such circumstances. Personally, I would never allow my own children to play with any gun-like toys including laser shooters and other popular toys today. Although this may spark debate, I believe it will benefit my children in the long run. By providing children with toy weapons, parents essentially endorse behaviors associated with guns: violence and aggression (article 25). If I discovered that my child's friend had toy guns at their house, I would still permit them to play there

but inform the friend's parents that my child cannot participate in such activities. Most respected individuals would remove the toy guns while my child is present. Some argue that banning handguns infringes on the Second Amendment rights.According to this amendment, individuals have the right to bear arms for a well-regulated militia, which is crucial for safeguarding a free state. In my interpretation, this right only applies to those protecting the United States through armed forces. When the Constitution was written, gun violence was not a pressing issue. However, times have changed and so should the amendment. I propose that it should state individuals have the right to bear arms if it is necessary for the security of a free state through armed forces and law enforcement. This would eliminate any controversy about the constitutionality of prohibiting handguns.

Furthermore, I believe there should be regulations on violence depicted in media. When someone turns on their TV or radio, they will inevitably encounter some form of violence. This exposure has a significant impact on children who may perceive violence as acceptable or even cool in certain cases. Many people now believe that if an artist sings about violence or an actor portrays killing on screen, it must be morally acceptable. In my opinion, currently, the media is the most influential factor contributing to growing violence in America.

Although television's level of violence has become excessive, the judiciary system cannot intervene due to First Amendment protection.When the Constitution granted freedom of the press, its creators probably couldn't have foreseen the extent to which songs would depict killing or television would portray brutality. However, parents can control their child's exposure to

violence by using tools such as v-chips, which allow them to block certain TV shows based on their rating. Additionally, many televisions offer a feature that enables parents to block specific channels by entering a code. These tools are highly beneficial in reducing the amount of violence that children are exposed to through television.

Moreover, song lyrics increasingly contain phrases suggesting or discussing violent acts. Although CDs come with explicit lyrics warning stickers, these precautions do not appear to be effective in addressing the issue. A suggested regulation for music stores could be the inclusion of a sticker on CDs indicating that only those who are eighteen years or older can purchase them. It would also be beneficial for producers to offer CDs with both explicit and edited lyrics. This way, younger individuals, such as twelve-year-old children, can enjoy their preferred music without being exposed to explicit language.

By implementing these measures, we can prevent the negative influence that certain music genres may have on young minds.Similarly to the rating systems in place for television shows, books and music should also have their own rating systemsAlthough there are fewer children reading books compared to those watching TV or listening to music, the real concern lies with the Internet and computer games. The case of the two boys from Columbine who played war games and learned bomb-making through the Internet serves as an example. It is crucial for the United States Government to regulate these games and monitor websites on the Internet. Personally, I will impose restrictions on my own children regarding their music choices, television shows, and leisure activities. I believe that children do not need exposure

to violence or crimes for entertainment purposes. If we can successfully implement strategies to reduce media violence in the next decade, I may not have to worry as much about restricting my children's activities. It should be noted that sports hold a unique place in terms of cognitive and emotional separation from everyday life. Athletes' behavior on the field should not be seen as a reflection of their character outside of sports. Physical contact during games is natural and not inherently wrong, but issues arise when athletes go beyond game boundaries with aggressive actions. Aggression should have limits and certain acts are unacceptable.Although athletes strive to dominate their opponents, it is crucial not to force them out of the game. This aligns with the sentiment expressed in article 29, which states that severe aggression, such as paralyzing someone through tackling, should result in suspension until the lesson is learned. As sports figures, athletes bear the responsibility of being role models for others to admire. If they cross the line or exhibit aggression outside of sports, they fail to fulfill this duty. Just like anyone else, athletes must face consequences for not performing their job properly and should not receive special treatment. It is worth noting that sports do not promote violence in society; rather boxing, football, and hockey are often mentioned as sports with high levels of aggression. When individuals choose to participate in these sports, they acknowledge both the highly physical nature of the activity and its potential risks. Personally, I have no issue whatsoever with these three sports; removing their physical contact would diminish enjoyment for both players and spectators alike. While I

allow my children to engage in contact sports, I ensure they understand the difference between acceptable behavior during a game and how they should conduct themselves outside of it.I hold the belief that a person's inclination towards violence is not automatically determined by their religious beliefs, unless they intentionally practice their religion in such a manner. Many individuals who identify as Christians still participate in warfare, suggesting a decrease in overall dedication to faith and erosion of moral aspects and adherence to religious doctrines. From my perspective, I interpret the Christian commandment "Thou shall not kill" literally, without any exceptions. Even within the context of war, I do not believe this commandment allows individuals to take another person's life. Consequently, I do not support theories like just war or any form of warfare. In my view, religions should not dictate positions on various matters; instead, they should allow individuals to form personal opinions based on their own beliefs. This is particularly important considering the diverse perspectives held by many people today. The significance of religion lies in people's belief in a higher being; however, its impact on every aspect of life may vary from person to person. If Jesus were alive today, he would likely be extremely disappointed with everyone for not following his ways wholeheartedly. However, societal changes over 2,000 years make it unrealistic to expect individuals to adhere fully to every aspect of their religion.Throughout history, figures like Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. have demonstrated the effectiveness of pacifism and civil disobedience. These nonviolent approaches remain highly impactful if implemented. However, it seems that violence has become the default solution for many

individuals today. Personally, I strongly advocate for pacifism and believe that dialogue should be the preferred approach to resolving conflicts whenever possible. Not all disputes necessitate warfare and the loss of innocent lives or destruction of nations. In fact, I would refuse to participate in war myself, seeking refuge in Canada if required to fill out draft cards as a woman. My opposition extends to war entirely.

According to article 34*, military purposes consume $1.3 million every minute globally, which is staggering. Additional intriguing facts about military spending include having a stockpile of nuclear weapons with an explosive force over 5,000 times greater than World War II's munitions combined. Moreover, the cost of a single new nuclear submarine equals the annual education budget for 23 developing countries with 160 million school-age children (article 34). This raises questions about why we allocate such significant time and energy towards nuclear weapons instead of improving education and teaching peaceful conflict resolution skills to children.

Nonviolent solutions may require more time and effort; however, there is potential for everything to be resolved without resorting to violenceNowadays, people are too busy to sit down and find solutions. In my opinion, peaceful methods are more effective than violent ones. Just consider the achievements of Martin Luther King Jr. in less than a year compared to the limited progress made in the Middle East since engaging in warfare. Undoubtedly, Martin Luther King accomplished more. It is crucial for the United States and every other country to come together and calmly discuss their perspectives with the aim of resolving their problems. There is no need for ongoing conflict; instead, we should collaborate to improve the

world for everyone rather than being self-centered and solely focusing on our own nations.