g the Good Guys: School Zones and the Second Amendment” the author Grant Arnold compare and Heller case, District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 575 (2008), the US supreme court held, for the first time, that the US Constitution, under the Second Amendment, right to keep and bear arms was protected. Because of the media sensationalizing the school shootings, many looked at disarming society as a means to eliminate school shootings. Arnold further goes on to analyze the Second Amendment as it relates to the Gun Free Zones established by many state laws. "The United States Code (U.S.C.) is 'the codification by subject matter of the general and permanent laws of the United States.' Title 18 deals with crimes and criminal procedure. Under Part I (Crimes), chapter 44 deals with firearms. …show more content…
One such unlawful act came to be known as the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1990” (Arnold 495). One must acknowledge that the Columbine shooting, and every other school shooting past 1990, took place after the Federal Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1990 was enacted. This law did nothing to prevent our children from being murdered, it merely established a framework by which one can be simply be prosecuted for violating the provisions contained within. Passing more laws aimed at prohibition are meaningless and ineffective. Unless the Colorado State Legislature provides each school district with the means to actually enforce the Federal provisions of the Gun-Free School Zone Act, beyond that of just prosecution when the law is breached, any individual is free to physically bring a firearm onto the campus. Compliance with this law, as any law is, is only applicable to those that voluntarily comply; prohibition of guns brought into K-12 campuses are an exercise in futility without the means, such as a metal detector, to enforce the federal
Thomas Jefferson was a man who believed that all American citizens need to be educated so that they may exercise their rights. He saw public education as essential to a democracy. One proposal he made for public education would guarantee that all children could attend public schools for three years. However, much like other early school reforms, this proposal received much rejection and was never brought into being. Despite this rejection, Jefferson still believed that America needed public education. Eventually, he opened the University of Virginia. Even though his bills and proposals to benefit public education never saw the light of day, he still made many contributions to public education by providing the foundation on how a democracy should handle educating its
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...
As the generations of America’s youth continue to grow, so does the increase in violent crimes associated with each generation. Over the last decade, studies have shown that school shootings have increased by an astonishing 13%. Although this figure as a percentage does not seem like much, it makes one stop and think. Parents blame the video games and their violent behaviors for the influence on their children’s daily lives. Grandparents blame the child’s parents for not showing them the right way to grow up in the world. And then we have that child’s friends who say that this child just was not respected by their classmates, or perhaps even bullied into this violent nature. Regardless of the cause to this violent increase, many Americans do believe in a solution: gun control. Gun control is the situation in which the federal government would put a ban on owning firearms. Contrary to what many “hard-core” Americans believe, gun control would not necessarily ban them from owning hunting rifles or even personal handguns. It would simply limit the ownership of semi-automatic assault rifles, and other rifles of this nature. This does not contradict the Second Amendment of the Constitution which states that American citizens have the Right to Bear Arms. I believe in the constitutional Right to Bear Arms, and I am against any attempt to eradicate that right for any American citizen: however, I am for gun control in the sense of lowering the possession of semi-automatic and fully-automatic rifles.
Heller,” the United States Supreme Court revealed what the Second Amendment is really about. In June 2008, a S.W.A.T. officer with the Washington, D.C., Police Department sued in the District of Columbia District Court for the right to carry a handgun while off duty. The Supreme Court ruled that he had the right to carry a weapon for a lawful purpose, and the District Court's opinion was reversed from the decision in 1939 when the Second Amendment was last interpreted. It also ruled that two District of Columbia laws, one that banned handguns and the other one that required firearms kept in the home to be disassembled or trigger-locked, violated the Second Amendment
The Second Amendment is often misinterpreted because of the wording; people believe it only applies to the military or militia. The Second Amendment reads; “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.” On June 26th, 2008, the Supreme Court established, in the case District of Columbia v. Heller, that citizens are the militia and the Second Amendment is an individual right. McDonald v. Chicago, set the precedent that the amendment covers every state and locality—not just federal enclaves (Levy 1). The Second Amendment has two clauses, the Operative Clause and the Prefatory Clause. The Operative Clause is the actual protected right and the Prefatory Clause is t...
The Benefits of the Second Amendment In a tragic event such as a mass shooting, a large population of Americans are quick to draw the conclusion that the right to own a gun is harmful to society; however, the second amendment is what allows the American people to protect themselves from such shooting instances. The privilege of owning a concealed firearm is beneficial to the American population when well-regulated for reasons such as self-defense and expressing freedoms which U.S. citizens are privileged enough to receive through the Second Amendment given they pass a background check. The second amendment is what makes the privilege of owning a gun legal. This thesis paper will highlight the benefits of the right to own a gun under the Second Amendment, as well as look at why gun control activists think differently about this highly controversial topic of gun control. As stated by the second amendment, “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” (Cornell University Law School Legal Information Institute, Second Amendment).
In Connecticut, gun laws were strengthened following the mass shooting of 6 adults and 20 children in their school in December 2012. Similarly, Colorado strengthened its gun control laws following the 1999 mass shooting that occurred at Columbine High School. Before the shootings, there was a loophole in the law that allowed the sale of guns at gun shows without any background check. This loophole was effectively sealed when Colorado voters approved a measure that would mandate compulsory background checks for gun purchases, even at gun shows.
In current day society, it is frequently promoted as self-defense and our “duty” as Americans to own a gun of some sort. The second amendment to the constitution declares that “We the People” are allowed to bear arms because we live in a free State. Although these statements are true, at what cost? The question, “at what cost,” arises due to the recent push for an extension and enforcement of the second amendment. The people of the States have been pushing for desired concealed carry at public areas, such as schools. Statements and questions of concern have been on the as to whether or not this idea is “smart”. Contrary of it allowing some people to feel safe, the idea should be imposed. Guns are weapons and they have the history behind them
School shootings have altered American history greatly over the past two decades. From 1997 to 2007, there have been more than 40 school shootings, resulting in over 70 deaths and many more injuries. School shoot-outs have been increasing in number dramatically in the past 20 years. There are no boundaries as to how old the child would be, or how many people they may kill or injure. At Mount Morris Township, Michigan, on February 29th, 2000, there was a 6 year old boy who shot and killed another 6 year old girl at the Buell Elementary School with a .32 caliber pistol. And although many shootings have occurred at High Schools or Middle Schools, having more guns on those campuses would not be a good environment for children to grow up in. However, on a college campus, the pupils attending are not children anymore; the age range is from 17 to mid 20’s. Therefore they understand the consequences associated to the use of weapons and have gained more maturity. In April 16th, 2007, at Blacksburg, Virginia, there was a shooting rampage enacted by Sung-Hui Cho (23 years, from Centreville, VA) who fired over 170 rounds, killing 32 victims, before taking his own life at the Virginia Tech campus. Colleges and Universities would be a much safer place, for student and teacher, if guns were permitted on campus for self-defense purposes.
Although most security measures passively make schools safer, it is not nearly enough to prevent an individual who intends on creating mass violence from completing his or her task. State representatives, national organizations, school staff, and parents need to come together to figure out the most reliable ways to prevent an active shooter situation from occurring in their schools. One solution that has been active is many schools have partnered with local law enforcement agencies to provide a police officers to patrol school grounds....
Nelson Lund, JD, PhD, Professor at George Mason University School of Law once stated, "The right to self-defense and to the means of defending oneself is a basic natural right that grows out of the right to life …. many [gun control laws] interfere with the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves against violent criminals”. When we 're born, we are born with the right of life, and with the right of life came the right to self protection. There has been many laws that contradict the right of life just as the right of self protection. Justice Stevens once stated that “The Second Amendment’s structure was notable for its omission of any statement of purpose related to the right to use firearms for hunting or personal self-defense”. Justice steven noted that the second right amendment covers us from self defence and hunting. Self defence is a really big topic because of the fact that most people die on the hands of others because they have nothing to defend themselves with. A report from New York Times once said that Wayne Lapierre, N.R.A executive vice president once stated that “The only only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun”. Reports were found that in Newtown connecticut in a public school, none of the school employees were armed and they had no defence when it came down to a school shooting. People were harmed and
When someone has a license to carry a concealed firearm, it does not mean that they should be able to carry wherever they would like. No one person is responsible enough for that privilege. In a high stress situation of an active shooter scene, even a highly trained person can make a bad assessment of the situation. Someone that just bought their first firearm or just got their license to carry, can make the situation worse. Firearms should not be allowed on any school campus because they are dangerous, can lead to more gun violence, and more innocent deaths due to inexperience.
As violence and murder rates escalate in America so does the issue of gun control. The consequence of this tragedy births volatile political discourse about gun control and the Second Amendment. The crux of the question is what the founding fathers meant when they wrote, “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.” Since the writing of the Second Amendment the make and model of firearms has changed dramatically and so has the philosophies of the people. A rifle is no longer defined as a single shot, muzzle-loading musket used to primarily protect families or solely for food. Should the weapons we use today be protected by an amendment written nearly 222 years ago? Should the second amendment be rewritten? Does the Second Amendment apply to individual citizens? These questions spark extensive debates in Washington D.C. regarding what the founding fathers intended the amendment to be. The answer to this question lies in the fact that despite hundreds of gun control articles having been written , still the gun control issue remains unresolved. History tells us gun control debates will be in a stalemate until our judicial system defines or rewrites the Second Amend. This paper will examine the history of the Second Amendment, and attempt to define the framers intent, gun control legislation and look at factors that affect Americans on this specific issue...
So if arming teachers, increasing security, or trying to identify possible shooters won’t stop shootings, what will. What these lawmakers have failed to notice is the common denominator. Not all shooters are mentally ill, not all of them show signs of violence, and not all of them are able to bring weapons to school easily. But, all of these shooters have one thing in common:
On the morning of December 14, 2012 at approximately 9:30 am, tragedy broke in the small town school of Sandy Hook Elementary in Newton, Connecticut. The lives of 27 innocent people were taken. The gunman Adam Lanza fatally shot 20 schoolchildren, 6 adult staff members and his own mother’s before turning the gun on himself. This incident has since been branded the second deadliest mass shooting, next to the 2007 Virginia Tech Massacre. The tragedy ignited a very controversial debate about the regulation of guns more known as gun control. The argument of gun control circles around the impact of passing laws to regulate the sales and possession of firearms. Gun advocates argue that the passing of gun control laws will be a violation of their second amendment rights, which protects the rights of an individual to keep and bear arms. Those supporting gun control are in favor for the instituting of policies that make the sales and possession of firearms even stricter, perhaps the ultimate banning of guns. Should we wait for horrific tragedies to pressure lawmakers to pass gun control laws or should they be already be enforced to protect the people and make society safer? Gun control laws need to be enforced on the account that guns are becoming more and more accessible; it will ensure the safety of our citizens and will perhaps decrease gun violence.