Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Controversy for the second amendment
Policy formulation on guns
Controversy for the second amendment
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
With the current election quickly approaching, gun control has become a very important topic. Recent events such as the Boston Marathon Bombing, the San Bernardino shooting and other similar events have raised the question if the Second Amendment should be compromised.
It is important that the Second Amendment not be compromised in order to protect the citizens of the United States. Allowing citizens to have possession of guns ultimately ensures their safety. By having a gun, citizens and home owners in the United States are able to protect themselves if they are confronted by another person who has a gun. The threat of even obtaining a gun without ammunition can cause people to think twice before threatening you since they know you are able
Since the inception of the Brady Act, over 118 million applications for firearm transfers or permits were subject to background checks. About 2.1 million applications, or 1.8%, were denied.
Over the centuries, the Supreme Court has always ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects the states' militia's rights to bear arms, and that this protection does not extend to individuals. In fact, legal scholars consider the issue "settled law." For this reason, the gun lobby does not fight for its perceived constitutional right to keep and bear arms before the Supreme Court, but in Congress. Interestingly, even interpreting an individual right in the 2nd Amendment presents the gun lobby with some thorny problems, like the right to keep and bear nuclear weapons.
The federal government should not ban the usage of guns because we need them to hunt and able to protect ourselves. People need to learn to be able to be around gun without the worry but those who use gun inappropriately shouldn’t have the guns.
In conclusion, the second amendment is very important for the United States of America in order to protect our freedom and the common good. Our founding fathers gave us this right to ensure us the ability to protect those self-evident truths. Further, our government has already taken away much of our freedom and we need our guns to protect ourselves from this overreaching government. Most of all, the reason the second amendment is important is in order to ensure us our freedom and make sure we are not enslaved by our government. For these reasons, we must protect and fight for our second amendment right to bear arms.
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?
history with a right to bear arms. Finally one can see the conflict of views
The Second Amendment 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.” This statement basically means that people should be able to own guns for their own security and that right should not be taken away. The Second Amendment was added to the Constitution because the creators of the Constitution wanted to make sure that it protected basic rights, including the right to bear arms. It was also added to the Constitution because shortly after it was ratified, James Madison wanted to give more power to the state militia and to give more power to the people to give them the ability to fight back against the Federalists and the tyrannical government they were creating. After fighting off the British, the Second Amendment was created to give citizens the opportunity to fight back against controlling government and protect themselves with their own weapons.
The second amendment is made up of two clauses, the prefatory clause and the Operative Clause. The Prefatory clause states, “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State...?” The Operative Clause states, “...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” There is often many discord between whether the second amendment is talking about two separate groups, the militia or the people. The prefatory clause in my opinion announces the purpose for which the right was created, but doesn't suggest the main reason that the right to bear arms is valued. According to Justice Stevens, the prefatory clause stated that the purpose was to protect the state’s interest in maintaining an armed militia to
We are entitled to the right to bear arms and taking that right away would be unconstitutional. Guns are not the cause for all the violence and crimes that have happened over the years. They do not increase the death rates. Children are more likely to die in a car or swimming pool accident then gun related deaths (VerBruggen). The weapons are needed for protection and hunting, owning a gun is not unconstitutional Taking the Second Amendment away or changing it would be unconstitutional and Un American, It is like any other right. This right is one of the reasons why we are the land of the free and home of the brave. “Any society that will give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both” - Benjamin Franklin
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.
America is the most well armed nation in the world, with American citizens owning about 270 million of the world’s 875 million firearms (Marshall). Indeed, this is more than a quarter of the world’s registered firearms. The reason why Americans own so many guns is because of the Second Amendment, which 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.” (Rauch) This amendment guarantees U.S. citizens the right to have firearms. Since this amendment is relatively vague, it is up for interpretation, and is often used by gun advocates to argue for lenient gun laws. Hence, gun control is a frequently discussed controversial topic in American politics.
... government to have such high-tech weapons. Equally, they wanted to be trained on how to handle guns too; so in response the Bill of Rights was created. Cases such as District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald vs. Chicago (2010), showed readers that the Second Amendment allowed people to exercise rights given to them. In both cases, each defendant stood up for the right to possess a gun. In the end, the Supreme Court ruled that owning a gun was a fundamental right already in existences. In other cases such as Shepard vs. Madigan (2011) and Moore vs. Madigan (2012), gun rights helped to play an important role in self-defense as well as other incidents. The Second Amendment allowed each individual to carry a concealed handgun in public. All in all, guns have help deter crimes. They have helped in stopping criminals and have protected the rights of gun owners.
The second amendment states “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The Founding Fathers included this in the Bill of Rights because they feared the Federal Government might oppress the population if the people did not have the means to defend themselves as a nation or individuals.
Nevertheless, guns are very dangerous and they are used in all sorts of criminal activities already. Therefore, the benefits of having a gun outweigh the drawbacks of not having a gun. No matter what each individual’s beliefs are in regard as to whether gun control should or should not be enforced, the Second Amendment of the Constitution gives each person the right to bear
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.