More handpicked essays just for you.
The 2nd amendment of the constitution for gun control
Second amendment gun control arguments
Second amendment gun control arguments
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
My article deals with the right to bear arms mentioned in the Second Amendment. The conflict that my article highlights is how the Supreme Court has declined to hear cases that deal with gun-rights. This past Monday, the Supreme Court rejected two gun-rights cases which continued their seven-year trend of renouncing cases related to gun-rights. The two cases were Kolbe v. Hogan and Norman v. Florida in which Maryland and Florida’s gun-control laws were challenged. In Kolbe v. Hogan, Kolbe disputed about how Maryland’s ban on specific semi-automatic rifles and handguns was unconstitutional. However, in Norman v. Florida, Norman questioned the ban that Florida placed on openly carrying firearms in public. Likewise, the lower courts have supported …show more content…
Because the right to bear arms is listed in the Second Amendment, I think that every individual in this country who has no criminal history with guns should have the right to own a gun. In my opinion, guns are essential in protecting individuals during dangerous times such as home invasions. Also, I believe that restrictive gun laws simply infuriate members of society. As a result, some of them can be influenced into rebelling against the government by finding illegal or imprudent ways of obtaining a gun. This could lead to more crimes which would produce an outcome contradictory to the reason for the government implementing restrictive gun laws in the first place. I think that it is unacceptable for the government to enforce restrictive gun laws or ignores gun-rights cases because an act of carelessness and inconsideration for citizens is being displayed on the government’s behalf. Lastly, the government should serve as a resource of protection for the people and strive to ensure that their rights as well as their safety are being
environments. Bill Clede ideas in his article seem to be guild by the idea of
It is 1776, the United States had just declared it’s Independence from England and one of those reasons for departing was the requirement to house British soldiers at anytime. After the French and Indian War England felt the need to thousands of soldiers in the colonies and an colonial quartering act was passed in 1765.When the British required the quartering of soldiers in the colonies it had passed in England that quartering of soldiers was not required. This quartering act on the colonies along with overtaxing lead to the start of the Revolution.Once the Americans won the war and had need to draft a constitution for the newly formed country, the exclusion of this requirement had to be added to the Bills of Rights.
On December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights was ratified effective by Congress. These first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America promised the states certain rights and freedoms which could not be infringed by the government. After all, the founding fathers knew from experience that men in their weakness were often tempted by power. They had become all too familiar with this when under the control of King George in England. Therefore, in order to protect the future people of their beautiful country, they promised certain liberties which could not be taken away. Every single one of these freedoms is important for the United States of America. However, the second amendment is especially important to our nation because it allows the people to protect their freedom and defend themselves and the common good against an overreaching government.
The U.S. should not have gun control laws. The Second Amendment to the Constitution 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.” This amendment has been around since 1791, and there has been gun control almost as long as it's been around. The National Rifle Association is an advocate of the Second Amendment and an opponent of those who propose restrictions on guns. Even Presidents Reagan and Bush are members, and Nixon, Eisenhower, and Kennedy were also members. Why do people feel the need to own a handgun? One reason is heritage. For as long as this country has been around, there have been gun owners, to defend themselves and to hunt for food. Buying, owning, or carrying a handgun doesn't hurt anyone. Until a person commits a crime, he/she is free to choose what he/she wants to do. Even if guns were completely banned from the U.S.A., people would still find a way to get them. Criminals would get guns. They would have their way, and there would be nothing we could do about it. We would have no way to defend ourselves. What is gun control to you? To me, it is the unconstitutional regulation and banning of guns to try to keep the crime rates in this country down. Does it work? Some gun laws are okay and they may work to some extent, but not to the extent that was intended. As for most of these gun laws such as the Brady Law, it serves no purpose. It is only there to make our lawmaking bodies and those of us who are too naive to see the truth feel better. Do you really think that the Brady Law keeps handguns out of the hands of criminals?
For hundreds of years Americans have been growing up with the notion that it is a right to own a gun. Since the creation of the second amendment, people all over the United States have been able to guns for private use. Guns operated by the public are said to have a variety of uses such as, being able to protect oneself if conflict arises, grants the ability to put food on the table, and are used in competitions shooting targets against other people. But for many people guns have been seen as the root of all evil. Anti-gun users think that guns cause a variety of unexpected and innocent deaths. They also think that there are not enough laws in place that allow just about anyone to purchase a gun. The question of should guns be legal to all citizens has plagued our society. Do you think it is morally right for anyone to arm themselves and use it when they deem it to be necessary? Or do you think that the 2rd amendment seem unnecessary and outdated law that needs to be rewritten? These questions are just two of many that have thrown back and forth between pro-gun and anti-gun users.
history with a right to bear arms. Finally one can see the conflict of views
The Second Amendment to the Constitution(Second Amendment) of the United States of America(USA) is one of the most controversial. The Second Amendment specifically grants that, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed"
Imagine enjoying a movie at Cinema 10, eating a meal at Taco Bell, or even sitting in a history class at Carman-Ainsworth High School while people all around you are carrying loaded guns! Although this may seem unbelievable, it is possible because the second amendment of the United States Constitution gives citizens the right to possess and carry guns. It is understandable that Americans would want to possess guns such as shotguns and rifles for the popular sport of hunting. However, it is ridiculous that our government would allow people to carry handguns. Handgun possession should be strictly limited, because they are made solely to kill people, they have increased the murder rate in the U.S., and they have even allowed children to easily kill other children.
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.
Ninety bullets rang through the air, seven bodies hit the asphalt, and blood pooled N. Clark Street in Chicago, Illinois. The St. Valentine's Day Massacre represented one of the bloodiest, catastrophic maltreatments of the Second Amendment, and illustrated how citizen’s ignored the responsibilities that came along with the ownership of a weapon. This massacre relates to the theme “Rights and Responsibilities in History” because it shows a group of individuals irresponsibly taking their unalienable Constitutional rights and using it to solve trivial conflicts with other citizens. On February 14, 1929, the true intentions of the second amendment were massacred as a Chicago gang ignored their responsibilities as gun owners and decimated other citizens.
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.
“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.” The right of all Americans to bear arms is a right the Founding Fathers held to equal importance as the Constitution itself. Gun control laws directly violate this right and therefore should not even be under consideration. Even if that issue is overlooked, gun control advocates state that in order to reduce firearm related violence, gun control laws must be implemented to remove the violence caused by firearms. Although this may seem reasonable, the consequences of such laws are ironically counterproductive; they exacerbate the problem instead of fixing it. Besides the fact that the American Constitution guarantees its citizens the right to bear arms, the idea of restricting gun ownership in order to reduce firearm-related violence would ultimately fail given the previous experiments of gun control in England and in numerous states.
Americans participated in a great debate through the 60's, 70's, 80's, and into the 90's. It is the argument of whether handguns, shotguns, and rifles should be restricted or banned. This debate over ownership of a firearm has produced strong emotions through the past years and does not seem to be abating. Does the U.S. Constitution give people the right, or should guns be restricted or banned because they are used in the commission of many crimes? Some argue that the right to bear arms is not as vital today as it was in the 1700's, or that it does not apply to individuals. Others argue that it is an individual right guaranteed by the Constitution to own a firearm.
The topic of gun control comes with a widely spilt crowd. Some people believe that gun control is essential, especially in today’s world. Some people think gun control will help with decreasing crime and making the nation a safer place for us to live. On the other hand, there are people who speak of anti-gun control. These people believe the right to bear arms would make our nation a safe place to live due to the fact that we would have protection. Do you think the Government has the right to make something illegal like the right to bear arm? In my opinion, the Government cannot simply because it will be an offence to our founding fathers, who gave us the national right to bear arm. Also, for making
The Second Amendment of the United States protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms. It was adopted on December 15, 1791 along with the rest of the Bill of Rights. The United States Government should not infringe on those rights by the enforcement of gun control against law-abiding citizens. Gun control does not reduce crime, does not stop criminals from obtaining guns, and does not address the real issue of violent crime. There is no evidence that gun control affects the crime rate. The United States government is attempting to reduce violent crime by controlling the amount of guns on the market, who is allowed to purchase a gun, and what type of gun a person is allowed to purchase. The only people affected by gun control laws are the law-abiding citizen that should be allowed to purchase firearms without the government’s interjection.