- Get Free Essays and Term Papers


Autor:   •  November 23, 2018  •  1,690 Words (7 Pages)  •  305 Views

Page 1 of 7


traits (virtues and vices) that are, or could be,

1notivating the people

involved in the situation.

Definition of Ethical Conduct

Ethical conduct is the action that will achieve the best consequences.

Ethical conduct involves always doing the right

thing: never failing

to do one’s duty

Whatever a fully virtuous person

would do in the circumstances.


Aim is to produce the most good.

Aim is to perform the right action.

Aim is to develop one’s character.

Non-consequentialist Theory/Framework:

The non-consequential theory can be looked upon under three approaches:

1. Deontological Ethics- The duty based approach which aims to perform the “right” actions. Importance to personal will and intention is taken in ethical decision making. The focus will be on duties that exist prior to the situation. These duties have certain obligations which determine the consequences.

In the Las Vegas case, the people hold the right to bear arms as mentioned in the Constitution, thus according to the above reasoning the State holds the obligation of providing this right to everyone and hence is bound to perform any action. Thus, in this case the right to bear arms is correct.

2. The right based approach: This approach stipulates that the best ethical action is that which protects the ethical rights of those who are affected by the action. It emphasizes the belief that all humans have a right to dignity. This dignity is the source of their gratification and felling successful in their in their world.

Thus, taking away the right to bear arms can in a way affect the people’s dignity which can have a negative impact. Thus this approach also contradicts the banning of the arms.

3. The Fairness or Justice approach: This approach states that all men are equal and should have equal rights to exercise. Free men should be treated alike. Fairness of starting point is the principle for what is considered just.

Thus, if it is a right for someone to bear arms (eg: soldiers), then it is the right of everyone to bear arms and hence banning will have a negative impact on such kind of people and will not be in good aspects for the betterment of people or discipline in the State.

Agent Centered Theory/Framework: 1. The Virtue Approach: This approach mostly focuses on developing one’s character. Aristotle, argued that ethics should be concerned with the whole of a person’s life, not with the individual discrete actions a person may perform in any given situation. Motivating people regarding the situation is one of the attributes of this theory. This framework asks the question of how the person wants to be seen as or what type of person he wants to be in the future. This question not only helps him develop in the present but also helps him to get reminded of the future and the implications which will be because of his actions today. It takes into account all parts of human experience and their role in ethical deliberation, as it believes that all of one’s experiences, emotions, and thoughts can influence the development of one’s character.

Thus with this theory we can help people to get motivated and understand the impact of bearing arms and how the society will be without them. Thus, they are the people who can help in a big way.


After understanding the framework and its implications, I am of the opinion of having Consequentialist Approach as it is the approach which understand the value of the greater good. It is the approach which helps in benefiting the society keeping aside self-interest and biases. The approach gives a steady of task of giving the benefits to the society.

Thus, after Las Vegas incident, right to bear guns should be banned. This banning will not only give people a sense of security in the nation but also, will build trust in the judicial system of the State. People can move freely without the fear of getting shot by any person. Banning guns will help the society at large and the benefits of not having gun can be seen by the people as the time passes. There is a need to change the laws for bearing arms as anyone can take the gun at any time. The laws right now are so lenient that people can take any number of guns from different sites and can keep a hold of it. This in a way helps them to invest their money and get a feeling of pride. However, some people take disadvantage of this and thus can create havoc.

There are instances where accidentally people get shot and lose their lives.

Thus, for some people it will be difficult. But for saving lives of majority of people banning need to be done. State is the collective of citizens. There cannot be any practice or claims on liberties if there are no citizens to exercise them. Thus, for the good of everyone, guns should be banned in a nation and sense of security should prevail in the country.

Thus, moral judgement on ethicality of this issue should be to use consequentialist approach and for the good of the majority of the people, right to bear guns should be banned in the country and security structure should be improvised for the betterment of the people. In my opinion it will be the right thing to do.


Download:   txt (10 Kb)   pdf (50.1 Kb)   docx (14.7 Kb)  
Continue for 6 more pages »
Only available on