Conclusion

Throughout this project, our team analyzed the current issue of gun control through political and editorial cartoons both in the U.S and internationally. As we began coding we realized that without research we didn't actually know too much about gun control, and what we did know was in some changes wrong.

From our coding we found that a lot of the debate really is hinged on the Second Amendment as mentioned earlier in the introduction. 

The 27 words in this amendment are what feed the controversy over the American people's right to keep and bear arms. Do we have the right to bear arms? Or, does the amendment imply that only the military and government agencies have that right? Should the Federal government play a stricter role in regulating the ownership of guns and firearms? Or are there other things we should be focusing on, like the mental health of our citizens and instilling background checks? We have analyzed cartoons from each of these points of views and see variable points in each but this is a debate that has no resolution yet. It has been going on for years and we see see this continuing in the future.  

We also found in selecting and coding our comics that almost all the comics reference to at least one of the three groups:

The NRA (National Rifle Association) and other organizations are against the regulation of firearms. In most cases, members of the NRA were drawn either as foolish looking hunters or as wealthy, fat businessmen. These representations frame the NRA so that it is assumed that they are just a bunch of rednecks who don't know what they're talking about, or that they get their way by soliciting with bribes of gifts and money.

On the opposite side we have advocates for increased gun control. In most of our research, a specific group or person was never fully pinpointed. Instead, we found that most the cartoons contained deceptions of children who's safety and well-being was often threatened. Looking at comics like this toys with your emotions and could easily make one think that gun regulation is very much needed.

Lastly, the President was a large focus in many cartoons. Since the Newtown shootings in December, Obama has been wrangling gun laws. Many cartoonists didn't alter his physical appearance, but they often exaggerated the context of situations making him appear aloof and uneducated on the subject of guns.

At the end of this, our group looked at the big picture and noticed that there are no positive associations with the NRA or Obama. If a cartoonist was leaning towards a certain stance, instead of portraying the positive aspects of the group they supported, they opted to highlight the weaknesses of the opposition. This caused us to ask ourselves a question. Is mudslinging the best way to change the public's opinion of something? 

We also wonder which method of persuasion worked best. Do the different approaches create confusion among citizens or do they clarify? No one knows. In the meantime though, let the cartooning and satire continue until the day when we can agree on a solution and move on.