More handpicked essays just for you.
Debate media influences public opinion
Influence of the media on politics
Influence of the media on politics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
California does not have enough gun laws, they need more restrictions! Guns have been around our country for a long period of time. Serving its purpose in the battles United States of America has fought in. Thanks to the Bill of Rights and the Second Amendment it gave United States citizens to own and practice the right to bear arms. In other words James Madison gave people the right to protect themselves then and ourselves now from any militia or these days our self-defense. Unfortunately our right to bear arms has begun to be infringed upon not long after the Second Amendment. Throughout the years most restrictions and new laws to purchase and own a gun were reasonable, given the certain circumstances, such as passing a test showing as the …show more content…
They think that controlling gun laws and trying to take away law abiding citizens gun rights will stop the violence and murder in the state of California. Little do they know by trying to take away gun laws will create more violence and even death. Bob Owens is an editor of BearingArms.com, an alumnus of Gun site Academy, an instructor with project Appleseed, and is the author of “So You Want to Own a Gun”. Owen claims in an article “What you’ll see in rebellion” if guns where to try and be taken away it would only cause more violence and chaos towards the government, causing a civil war to break out. Owen makes it clear as well as other law abiding citizens who speak on the topic of gun rights taken away will “Just as likely though, we’ll face fractious civil wars fought over issues we’ve not begun to fathom, and a much diminished state or states will result, perhaps guided by foreign interests. It will not be pretty. There will be no “winners,” and perhaps hundreds of thousands to millions of dead” (Bob Owen).It basically comes down to the situation if gun rights where taken away people will resist and fight back towards the government. It isn’t right to take away guns from Law abiding citizens. The people which do need gun stripped away from are the true criminals with charges. It isn’t the gun itself that’s a weapon, it’s when you place the …show more content…
Most of the gun control bills that have been passed have the same meaning. The difference is its worded differently. People and government officials word it differently so if for some reason one of the bills wouldn’t be passed they make another bill rewording different but having the same meaning to try and trick the governor and other government officials who could pass the bill. So far its been working, as for the rest of the bills passed: needing a background check to purchase ammunition as well for online ammunition, needing to report a missing firearm within 5 days or the individual will be considered criminalized, banning all firearms that have bullet buttons, banning any “grandfathered” magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, all these bills can be found on scpr.org. These are all bills that have been passed in 2016, not to mention all bills were passed in one day. Some of these bills have been dealt with before: “grandfather” magazines. Prior to the ban in 2001 any 30 round magazines owned before that year could be kept and used. Now the committee is trying to go back and try to ban those magazines that had apparently been dealt with. If this bill is passed the magazines that are legal to obtain if purchase before 2001 will have to be destroyed, sold to an FFL (Federal Firearm License) dealership, or taken out of
Joseph Sobran argues that, “there are solid constitutional arguments against gun control. For one thing, nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government granted the right to limit an individual's right to own firearms”. He states that the government has no right to limit guns. Even though he has a point there is a limit to that statement such as serious criminals and mentally unstable people. Likewise Sharon Harris states that guns protect people against criminals, “the right to bear arms protects the individual from violent aggressors and from the ineffective protection state and federal government is offering its citizens … criminals benefit from gun control laws that make it more difficult for ordinary citizens to protect themselves.” She believes that guns keep people safe and that regulating guns will only benefit criminals. This is not true because regulations help prevent criminals from getting guns. Having less regulations is a dangerous
The second amendment grants all Americans the right to bear arms. The ability to hold a firearm at any time as long as the firearm is registered. In the United states, all it takes to hold a firearm is a background check and a safety class. In a short reading from the “American Now” book a short article By Christina Tenuta called Responsible gun ownership saves lives she asks “do Americans really need guns?”, but are the guns really the problem? Although the second amendment requires some decent documents , the qualifications to obtain a firearm needs to be revised to a mental check, a family history check , and also to make it a priority for reinforcement to check on the registered firearm every six to twelve months.
still more gun-control laws. We need to enforce the laws that we have now. It's
The 2nd Amendment of the Constitution states, “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.” They feel like their basic right is being restricted by not being able to carry. “Many states have adopted the “stand your ground” legislation, which asserts that a person may justifiably use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of an unlawful threat, without an obligation to retreat first” (Aronowitz and Vaughn 57). Pro-gun activist also think that having guns on campuses for protection will likely reduce the amount of mass shootings. Pro-gun activist believe that you can’t always rely on the police for
The Gun Control problem in the United States of America is all because of the problem that we have with people not knowing how to use a gun, and the safety. The reason the laws are being brought to legislation is make sure that we protect our second amendment. Make sure that every American has the same right a bear a weapon, no matter the age but if they are fit to own a weapon.
Written on December 15, 1791 was the second amendment of the constitution. It states that "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."(Cite)? United States citizens have used guns for various reasons that include protection, hunting, and sporting reasons. The topic on gun control is a very complex topic that is discussed daily. It is such a big issue that it has both the democrats and republicans firmly established in their positions. One of the main reasons this has been such an important topic in recent years is because of all the murders and massacres that have happened recently in the United States. As our newly nominated president, Donald
gun control believe that gun control is wrong, and that it is a violation of
Throughout the years there has been an ongoing debate over the Second Amendment and how it should be interpreted. The issue that is being debated is whether our government has the right to regulate guns. The answer of who has which rights lies within how one interprets the Second Amendment. With this being the case, one must also think about what circumstances the Framers were under when this Amendment was written. There are two major sides to this debate, one being the collective side, which feels that the right was given for collective purposes only. This side is in favor of having stricter gun control laws, as they feel that by having stricter laws the number of crimes that are being committed with guns will be reduced and thus save lives. However while gun control laws may decrease criminals’ access to guns, the same laws restricts gun owning citizens who abide by the law; these citizens make up a great majority of the opposing side of this argument. These people argue that the law was made with the individual citizens in mind. This group believes that the Amendment should be interpreted to guarantee citizens free access to firearms. One major group that is in strong opposition of stricter gun control laws is the National Rifle Association (NRA). The NRA argues that having stricter gun control laws will only hinder law-abiding citizens. The final outcome on this debate will mainly depend on how this Amendment is going to be interpreted.
Of Americans 3% own half the country's 265 million guns, that means each of those 3% own more than one gun. We have the individual right to own and use these arms. Gun control is a big debate in politics right now. I personally do not believe in gun control, i just feel like if a good guy had a gun then he would be able to stop things like shootings from happening. So do organizations like the NRA (National Rifle Association), the GOA (Gun Owners of America), and the SAF (Second Amendment Foundation) “The answer to crime is not gun control, its law enforcement and self-control” (Alan Keyes political activist) This violates our second amendment right of the U.S. constitution to keep and bear arms. So it's all in the best interest that we keep gun control from happening, so that we can keep our second amendment.
Gun rights are the source of much controversy in today’s society. People have been skeptic after the multiple shootings that happened in the past few years. Recently, the NRA has been under constant threat by Congress. Background checks are not effective as planned. In order to keep the gun rights, changes need to be made in order to prevent gun control from being created.
The US constitution clearly states and has stated for the last 225 years that, “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.” There was controversy over this amendment, up until 2008 if this meant that a United States citizen had the right to own firearms for protection or only for those of a militia to be armed and maintain, it was decided then that the second amendment protected an individual 's’ rights to own firearms unconnected to any militia. With that being said for 225 years, Americans have bought, sold, and shot firearms. Americans shoot guns for a recreational sport every single day. Every day 91 Americans are killed
Gun control and self-defense has been a hot topic in the United States in the last couple of years, with the United States having 88.8 guns for every 100 people. People argue whether individuals should have the right to own and carry weapons or whether there should be a stricter regulation on guns. With crimes occurring everywhere in the United States it’s only logical to allow those who qualify for a concealed weapon the right to obtain a permit to carry. With the recent laws of concealed carry weapons being allowed in all 50 states and Jerry Brown banning concealed carry on college campuses, controversy is hotter than it’s ever been. Although we have seen weapons used for hurting, guns, when placed in concealed carry hands, are not the cause
Over the past year, the United States has been plagued with controversy in regards to gun control legislation. On January 24, 2013, Senator Feinstein introduced the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013. The Assault Weapons Ban was a bill written to stop the acts of sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing of military styled weapons. The NRA-ILA website quotes an excerpt of Feinstein’s bill, which states, “Feinstein’s new bill are as follows: Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms. The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law. Feinstein’s new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features.” (NRA-ILA) Wayne Lapierre, Executive Vice President of the NRA, said in 2009, “There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the guns you want to ban and you don’t want to ban. You’re going to ban these semi-autos, and then it’s going to be handguns, and then it’s going to be pump shotguns.” Lapierre’s statement supports the fact that the recent gun ban legislation across the United States will not solve the problem of increased violence.
Gun control is an awfully big issue in the United States today. Many people in America don’t agree with the gun control laws that they have today. Gun control laws only take guns and freedom away from law-abiding citizens. Many citizens have their own reasons for owning a gun. Why would the government want to make it harder for people to own a gun? People that own guns aren’t very likely to be attacked by criminals. Owning a handgun is one of the best ways of protection when used correctly. The second amendment states “the right to bear arms”; does this grant everyone the right to own a gun? Gun control laws have not been proven to do anything for citizens. Gun control laws just make it harder for the good guy average Joe to own a gun. Gun control laws are not a good idea, and are taking part in the loss of our freedom that was given to us.
We as citizens need to understand that guns are not for everyone to use. There are certain people that just cannot be around guns or have a gun with them because they can harm someone intentionally or accidentally due to the loss of self-control. There are people that are not responsible enough to handle a gun. I believe that having a gun should be like saving money and using that money in case of an emergency; you do not touch it for anything that is not worth it. You only touch it in a situation that you feel is needed. That is the way firearms should be used, you don’t use it unless something bad is happening or you feel that your life is being threatened. The reason the