I've been ask to explain using the six factors of "ethical intensity", which are: 1) Magnitude of consequences; 2) Probability of effect; 3) Social consensus; 4) Temporal immediacy; 5) proximity; and 6) Concentration of effect how a person might view gun control as an issue facing the United States.
Here is some information for you regarding the six factors of ethical intensity:
His issue contingent model incorporates a multidimensional construct called moral intensity,
which has the following six components: magnitude of consequences, social consensus, probability of effect, temporal immediacy, proximity and concentration of effect. Jones indicated that moral intensity affects recognition by Aits impact on the individual=s recognition of the consequences of decisions@ (p. 380).
The first component of moral intensity, magnitude of consequences, represents the relative harm
or good that arises from a moral act. For example, a drug is developed and tested that has a side effect that may result in death for 30 percent of the people who take it. The potential side effects of this drug have a higher magnitude of consequences than for a drug that may cause a skin rash in 30 percent of the people who take it. Therefore, recognition is more likely to occur with the drug that results in death than the one that results in a skin rash.
Social consensus, the second dimension of moral intensity, represents the degree of society=s
overall agreement that a moral action is good or evil. Social consensus may influence the vividness related to a moral issue because an issue may receive extensive public attention. For example, the FDA sped up the process for approving drugs for AIDS treatment, because of public ...