Gun Ownership
The second constitution amendment in America majorly stresses on the armament and gun ownership. This follows the high rate of gun ownership where citizens own them for various purposes like hunting and self-protection. The government through this constitution amendment wants to regulate gun ownership in the country. This paper looks at various aspects of gun ownership like the idea of gun ownership as a civil obligation, rebellions that played an important role of the militia debate, the position of the federalist and anti-federalists on gun control, how the gun culture revolved in the early 19th century and how slavery contributed to the gun control debates.
As explained by Saul Cornell the main understanding that arose from
…show more content…
This lead to the formation of two major groups known as the federalists and anti-federalists, the militia supported the ownership of guns as they were majorly the people who owned big farms and were able to haunt and s well waned to protect their much acquired property thus needed the firearms.
The two were the major groups that forms the two groups of the debate where the federalists supports the rule of gun ownership as a civil right to the American citizen while the anti-federalists totally objects the law. The second amendment is majorly about the armament and gun ownership where the citizens majorly object forming the major part of anti-federalists.
They object this as they state that the country is made up of over fifty states and when each state is armed, the level of peace and unity in the country will be derailed. This therefore forms opposing side of the laws in the country. The federalist on the other side contained the government and the able supporters including the militia. According to their opinion, this was a viable citizen right that helps to control the country in terms of safety country and self-protection and
…show more content…
This was passed and those who went against this law were to be fined heavily. These were the first regulation that leads to the ancient debate over gun ownership among the other laws like safety of gun powder and its storage and the shortcomings of the weapons that were concealed.
Slavery was another major factor that leads to the introduction of the debates against the gun ownership among the American citizens. Many slaves were killed using the guns as anyone who dared to go against his oppressor’s law was shot. Lester notes that democracy and human rights however gave them a voice to quest for their freedom and that the use of guns by their bosses during work should be abolished this lead formed the rebellion of the guns by the slaves.
From the above study, it is still debatable that the ownership of guns by the citizens is both beneficial and non-beneficial as well to the country. There are several positive effects as well as negative effects of gun ownership. The citizens with their guns are able to protect themselves and their property as well following the high level of insecurity in the nation today. This is as well disadvantageous as the high crime rate has been enhanced by the ownership of guns and other weapons in the country
Robert E. Shalhope, author of “The Armed Citizen in the Early Republic,” explores the controversy regarding the Second Amendment and concludes that the Second Amendment guarantees United States citizens the right to keep and bear arms. Shalhope, a specialist in eighteenth and nineteenth century American political culture, has a strong background in history as he is the George Lynn Cross Research Professor of History at the University of Oklahoma. Even though there are many different interpretations of the amendment, the Second Amendment clearly states that individuals have the right to bear arms. Shalhope argues that the Second Amendment provides every citizen the right to bear arms in order to protect themselves in the face of danger as well as to maintain freedom and liberty in a society.
Secondly, Madison points out that Americans are armed and. that the states control of militias will ".form a barrier." against the enterprise of ambition. "(Madison 242). Again In this argument, Madison goes back to his belief that the The federal government is unlikely to become oppressive because the people grant its power. Both the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists believed.
Anti –federalist believed that with out the bill of rights, the national government would became a to strong it would threating the americans peoples rights and libertys. Due to prior american revolution, ant-federalist did not forget what they fought for an believed that with a stronger national government, the president could become kind if he wanted. During this time people still feared a strong central government, due to british occupany of the states. Concidently the of people who wanted the bill of rights and were anti-federalist were famers and the working class, as to the fedarlist were extremely rich and powerful people Thomas Jeferson who was a active anti-federalist once wrote to james Madison A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular; and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inferences. (Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1787. ME 6:388, Papers
United States is a country that has problems with gun control, and this issue has many debates between whether or not people should be allowed to carry a gun on them. This free county not only for speech and religion, but also allows people to have the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment of the United States was written by our Founding Fathers,“A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” (Government). The main purpose of the Second Amendment when our Founding Fathers wrote this amendment was to help the American citizens to defend themselves from the government at that time, and other countries from invading their properties. However, the Second Amendment could be the opposite of what our Founding Fathers wanted it to be in the twenty-first century, because many criminals are taking advantage of the right to carry guns, which in example results with the purpose of showing off with their friends, revenge for their gang’s members, or try to be like their favorite hero in the movie they had watched. On July 20, 2012, a massive shooting occurred inside of a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado. The tragedy happened during a midnight screening of the film The Dark Knight Rises which killed twelve people and injuring seventy others. In response, this alarmed our government to rethink about the current gun control law in America. In A Well Regulated Militia by Saul Cornell, the author informed to his audience the different views of gun ownership in early America, which part was the most important part of the debate, how did slavery affect the debate over militias in the South, the Continental army officer’s views, and the arguments be...
The present essay aims to analyze the connection between American society and gun ownership. Also what this can provoke on the citizens. These issues have been highly debatable over the past fourteen years since the massacre on Columbine High School occurs on April 20, 1999. As gun ownership is closely related to availability of firearms, the people who are against this civil duty of bearing arms to defend themselves and theirs are terrified of being shot, so the fear has spread over the country. Another relevant aspect is the discrimination of students from Columbine School since the existing paranoia. Students are taken to court to declare about their ‘misbehavior’. Finally, all these negative feelings have increased within the country creating a division having ‘firearms’ as guilty.
While the Federalists believe in a strong, central government, the Anti-Federalists believe in the shared power of state and national governments to maintain the rights of all Americans .The Anti-Federalist favored a confederated government were the state and national governments could share power ,protect citizen’s freedom ,and independence. The Anti-Federalists found many problems in the Constitution. Many were concerned the central government take was all individual rights. Anti-Federalist primarily consisted of farmers and tradesmen and was less likely to be a part of the wealthy elite than were members of their rival the Federalist. Many Anti-federalists were local politicians who feared losing power should the Constitution be ratified and argued that senators that served for too long and represented excessively large territories would cause senators to forget what their responsibilities were for that state. They argued that the Constitution would give the country an entirely new and unknown form of government and saw no reason in throwing out the current government. Instead, they believed that the Federalists had over-stated the current problems of the country and wanted improved characterization of power allowable to the states. They also maintained that the Framers of the Constitution had met as a discriminatory group under an order of secrecy and had violated the stipulations of the Articles of Confederation in the hopes for the for ratification of the Constitution. The Anti-Federalist were sure that the Constitution would take away the rights of the American citizens and fought hard to stop the ratification on the
The way that an individual interprets the wording of the Second Amendment influences their point of view on who has the right to "keep and bear arms" (Amendment 2). The controversy brought on by the Second Amendment is because the Second Amendment does not clearly define whom "the people" are. This ambiguity has left room for action by legislative bodies and the courts to pass laws and make interpretations that influence the way this Amendment is applied and enforced. The Second Amendment says, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." (Amendment 2).
Opposing sides have for years fought over the laws that govern firearms. For the purposes of this paper "Gun Control" is defined as policies enacted by the government that limit the legal rights of gun owners to own, carry, or use firearms, with the intent of reducing gun crimes such as murder, armed robbery, aggravated rape, and the like. So defined, gun control understandably brings favorable responses from some, and angry objections from others. The gun control debate is generally publicized because of the efforts of the Pro-Gun Lobby or the Anti-Gun Lobby.
The United State of America, established by the Founding Father who lead the American Revolution, accomplished many hardship in order to construct what America is today. As history established America’s future, the suffering the United State encountered through history illustrate America’s ability to identify mistakes and make changes to prevent the predictable. The 2nd Amendment was written by the Founding Father who had their rights to bear arms revoked when they believe rising up to their government was appropriate. The Twentieth Century, American’s are divided on the 2nd Amendment rights, “The right to bear arms.” To understand why the Founding Father written this Amendment, investigating the histories and current measures may help the American people gain a better understanding of gun’s rights in today’s America.
There are gun control laws to try and reduce the number of violent shootings that occur. They are trying to put limits on weapons that Americans can own. The government is trying to take our guns away mainly because of people that are criminally insane. Most of the people who commit crimes don’t even have the weapons legally. If the government takes away the rights of people who are allowed to have firearms in their possession, it will most definitely cause an outrage. Most people believe that the people should be more capable of maintain proper use of the firearms instead of having them all taken away. Taking the firearms from Americans away would cause a lot more problems than there actually are. The people will be upset with the government taking firearms away because of the horrible people who harm innocent people using them. So they will do anything to their capabilities to keep them.
This debate has produced two familiar interpretations of the Second Amendment. Advocates of stricter gun control laws have tended to stress that the amendment’s militia clause guarantees nothing to the individual and that it only protects the states’ rights to be able to maintain organized military units. These people argue that the Second Amendment was merely used to place the states’ organized military forces beyond the federal government’s power to be able to disarm them. This would guarantee that the states would always have sufficient force at their command to abolish federal restraints on their rights and to resist by arms if necessary. T...
For years proposals for gun control and the ownership of firearms have been among the most controversial issues in modern American politics. The public debate over guns in the United States is often seen as having two side. Some people passionately assert that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own guns while others assert that the Second Amendment does no more than protect the right of states to maintain militias. There are many people who insist that the Constitution is a "living document" and that circumstances have changed in regard to an individual’s right to bear arms that the Second Amendment upholds. The Constitution is not a document of total clarity and the Second Amendment is perhaps one of the worst drafted of all its amendments and has left many Americans divided over the true intent.
It is believed that The Founding Fathers thought that the society benefited from guns being in the hands of the people. This way all citizens were able to defend themselves at all times.
In this article the author talks about the relationship between gun control laws and gun ownership rates in relation to crime rates. He informs his readers of the studies to determine whether gun ownership rates have any effect on criminal activity being that firearms are the leading cause of murders; and if by making gun control laws stricter will it lower the violent crime rates, and overall homicide rates.
The United States today can be a scary place. Someone that is disgruntled, has a mental health issue, radicalized through terrorist propaganda or for any other reason can take up a firearm and mass murder innocent people. It can happen anywhere, anytime, anyplace. Anyone that pays attention to any news or newspapers has probably heard something about gun control. It’s a hot topic in this country and around the world. There are a lot of problems with gun control and regulating guns in the United States. Before you can talk about solutions you need to isolate the problems keeping the solutions from being realized. The people who are for and against guns do have common solutions but there is strong opposition