The Right to Bare Arms Is the owner of a firearm more dangerous than the neighbor that does not? Firearms and how they are being used has been a very controversial topic. Firearms can be used for protection or could be used as a weapon to hurt someone. Both are very good reasons why people are so torn. Firearms have a positive effect on both the past and in society today. "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" (Encyclopedia). Having strict regulations might protect our society, or it could make it more dangerous. There are those that will not give up their right to own and bare arms because they think that it could give a murderer …show more content…
The respect of the firearm and of others is apart of the responsibility of owning a gun. Teachers could have a firearm and might be able to protect their classrooms if they have a Concealed Carry Permit that is eligible in the state where they are teaching. There are regulations that need to be followed and there are new ideas on how strict those regulations need to be. President Obama has ideas that he wants enforced on our country. The strict laws in Australia and the UK caused their guns to be banned. For us, that is against the second amendment in the Constitution of the United States. There are regulations that can be enforced to help keep Americans safe. The knowledge of these regulations working will not be known until it is tested. Part of the test was done in California where it did not help the crime rates to go down. There are many stories of guns and how they are being used as protection just like the one that was shared earlier on. Firearms have a positive effect on both the past and in society today. The second amendment has influenced many people and continues to do so. It changed the way people look at America. Land of the free, home of the brave. Ali Weinberg, Arlette Saenz, "Tearful Obama Details Executive Actions in Effort to Curb Gun Violence." 2016. 6 Jan. …show more content…
"Public Health and Gun Control --- A Review (Part II: Gun ..." 2011.
"Homeowner defends family, wounds intruder, KIDK, Idaho ..." 2015. 6 Jan. 2016
"How Gavin Newsom 's Initiative Will Flatten California Gun ..." 2016. 6 Jan. 2016 "NRA-ILA | Take it From Obama, ALL ELECTIONS MATTER!." 2015. 6 Jan. 2016
"NRA-ILA | Political Report | Touting Australia And UK: Obama And Clinton Give Away The Gun Control Endgame." 2016. 6 Jan. 2016
"Second Amendment | Wex Legal Dictionary / Encyclopedia ..." 2011. 6 Jan. 2016
Stolinsky, DC. "America: The Most Violent Nation? | Hacienda Publishing." 2011.
"Texas Governor Challenges Obama on Gun Control: 'Come and Take It ' » Infowars Alex Jones ' Infowars: There 's a war ..." 2016. 4 Jan.
One of the biggest debates in education is how to respond to gun violence in schools. According to BBC, “There were 64 school shootings in 2015” (BBC). One response to the rise in gun violence in schools is to arm teachers. Even our President has mentioned “giving a bonus” (Davis 2) to teachers that The fact that the idea of arming teachers is even being discussed is disappointing. Bringing more guns into a school is not the answer to gun violence. Most people that defend the idea that guns will “help” keep schools safe have basically three points: (1) teachers will be trained in gun safety, (2) it helps deter potential school shooters, and (3) it will make the students feel more safe. Even though there is some truth to those points, I think that the cons of arming teachers vastly outweigh the pros of arming teachers.
“Guns don’t kill, people kill people.” This is a popular saying heard in a number of R rated movies where gun violence is the predominate theme. One excellent illustration can be seen in the movie Romeo Must Die when the actor DMX said that phase as he was getting ready to shoot someone. The phase was first coined by Wayne LaPierre who is a long-time executive director of the National Rifle Association. From his words and from his job title, a person can correctly guess that he is a pro-gun activist. He is defending the notion that a gun is not required to kill someone. This is absolutely true. A person can kill another person with just their bare hands. However, guns provide people with the means to do so in an easier and faster manner. Without
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.
State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Our country has always believed in a citizens right to own a gun. It is a principle that is so important to our country, that it is listed as the second of twenty-seven constitutional amendments. Gun control is a subject of great controversy that carries many true and false claims. Many people believe our second amendment rights are being attacked, and that the government wants to take our guns away. It is my belief that Obama does not want to take our guns, but future administrations may use laws made today to do just that in the future. As more gun related tragedies occur in our country, the question has become "How can we reduce gun violence in our county?", as opposed to "How can we take the peoples' guns away?", but are the laws that the Obama administration are attempting to make paving the way for Americans being disarmed in the future? In this paper, I hope to help the reader realize that Obama does not want to take our guns, but the actions we are taking now may not be the best decisions for the present or the future.
Everyone has had that time in their life where they feel that they would be safer if they had some sort of protection, concealed carry is a great option for protection. Over the years it has been growing in popularity, more and more people are going out and getting their concealed carry permit. With more and more people going out and getting their permit, some may view it as dangerous, while others feel it is a necessity. Concealed carry is essential because, it allows added protection, has certain restrictions that the person must meet, and if guns are handled properly they are not as dangerous
Fields, Gary. "New Washington Gun Rules Shift Constitutional Debate." Wall Street Journal. 17 May. 2010: A. 1. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 22 Apr. 2014.
Like Mr. Cuellar said “ Being an US Customs I know any one with a gun in a shooting will help out to, there is more good people then bad and together we can take them down , that’s why I am with guns allowed in school campus , for the reason that I am also a father and care for the safety of my family members”. As he mentioned it can also be protection for oneself when you encounter a problematic situation. There are good reasons why we should allow them but there is more bad ones than good. Some people say that they’ll feel more protective if they have a gun with them , knowing someone you don’t know has one. If guns would be allowed under strictly rules and would have a lot of training and permissions / test people have to go through maybe like that I will be safe in school with guns
There is one reaction that is always to be expected after a mass shooting, and that is the call for an increase in control. This can be defined in numerous different ways, and can include a great deal of different aspects. People who call for an increase gun control in the wake of mass shootings are, in general, people who believe that more guns means more crimes. Gun control advocates cite studies that state, “Higher gun prevalence is associated with an increase in homicides, and suicides, and possibly even more residential burglaries” (Ludwig 17). Often times, after mass shootings, those in favor of more gun control look to countries like Australia, Canada, Great Britain and Japan, and their strict gun policy and cite this as the direction
Landau, Elaine. Armed America; The Status of Gun Control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Julian Messner, 1991.
“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.
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.
Johnson, Fawn. "The Silver Lining in the Gun-Control Defeat." National Journal. (2013): Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Web 31 Oct. 2013
People have questioned gun control long time. Many people wonder if anyone, aside from those who join the law force, should be allowed to carry guns. Benjamin Franklin once said, “Those who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety” (Wright 4). Franklin understood that taking guns away from law-abiding citizens would not uphold their liberty. Some people who argue for gun control state many violent crimes involve guns. Others believe a child could find the gun and something bad could happen to the child or others when a gun is unsafely stored. People who argue against gun control might say there is a huge psychological gap between citizens who shoot to protect themselves or their property and those who go into schools and shoot at others. Criminals will always find a way around gun control laws and will be able to obtain and use guns illegally. The second amendment protects gun rights for individual citizens. Reasonable gun control laws and educational steps can be taken to protect the majority of U.S. citizens. Gun control does not only take guns away from criminals, gun control also limits law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves and their families when necessary.
Allowing teachers to carry guns could help lower school shootings. “While some believe tighter gun controls are the answer, others believe the best solution comes in giving more people — like teachers and administrators — more training and more access to firearms that can save lives as well as take them away” (Evensen guns and teachers). “Our organization