Owning a gun is both a fundamental right and a derivative right. The derivative right goes in hand with a fundamental right, the right to protect oneself from harm (Stark, 2001). Therefore, it is a derivative right because it is “derived from the right of self-defense” and self-defense is most important (Huemer, 2003, p. 299). Owning a gun also is a prima facie right, which is a right that must be given moral weight, but can be overridden by important countervailing reasons (Huemer, 2003). The prima facie right is needed because we have the right to gun ownership, but if our intent of owning a gun is to harm our self or others the right may be overridden. Self-defense is a main reason for many gun owners. Placing a ban on gun ownership weighs …show more content…
The act to do the wrong requires a separate decision to perform that activity (Huemer, 2003). Life is complete with risk every day, ownership and recreational use of firearms do not fall under excessive risks to cause harm. Gun control advocates debate often that those who have access to guns have a higher chance of using that gun in a heated argument (Boylan, 2003). Refuting this debate is that normal atypical individuals do not hold the thought of shooting someone during an argument (Huemer, 2003). In support of the idea, early research in 1988 showed that eighty nine percent of adult murders in which the murder resulted from an argument, the criminal had a prior criminal history (Huemer, 2003). Also, those who process murder as an option to end an argument can do so without a …show more content…
This comes just weeks after a shooting at a Navy/Marine recruiting station. These events urge needs of gun safety but the issue lies in who are doing these shootings. Implementing more controls over guns will take guns out of non-criminal hands and put them in criminal hands. Banning of guns, or placing restrictions on concealed gun carry is not the answer. Finding ways to get them out of criminal hands is. Let it be in the form of stricter penalties for legally purchasing only to turn around and sell; make it harder for private sale of guns without background checks; limit magazine size; just don’t ban concealed carry or guns themselves. It is a person’s right to own a gun for recreational pleasure and
In America guns have been a part of the country’s society since it’s birth. Throughout history the citizens of the US have used firearms to protect the nation, protect their families, hunt for food and engage in sporting activities. The issue of Guns and gun control is complex. Weighing the rights and liberties of the individual against the welfare and safety of the public has always been a precarious balancing act. In the United States, gun control is one of these tumultuous issues that has both sides firmly entrenched in their positions. Those parties in favor of gun ownership and the freedom to use and keep arms, rely on the fact that the provision for such rights is enshrined in their constitution. In this climate of growing violence, rife with turmoil and crime, gun advocates feel more than ever that their position is justified. As citizens of the “Land of the Free” possessing a gun is a fundamental right, and may even be a necessity... Anti- gun lobbyists point to the same growing violence and gun related crimes in an effort to call on the government to take action. By enacting more laws and stricter control, these people not in favor of guns feel society would be better safer.
A growing number of publicized tragedies caused by gun violence have caused a great stir in the American community. Recently, President Barack Obama has made proposals to tighten the regulation of and the restrictions on the possession of weapons in America to lessen these tragedies. Should the legislative branch decide in favor of his proposals, all American citizens who do or wish to own the type of weapons in question or who use current loopholes in existing policy would be directly affected. His proposals, which are to “require background checks for all gun sales, strengthen the background check system for gun sales, pass a new, stronger ban on assault weapons, limit ammunition magazines to 10 rounds, finish the job of getting armor-piercing bullets off the streets, give law enforcement additional tools to prevent and prosecute gun crime, end the freeze on gun violence research, make our schools safer with new resource officers and counselors, better emergency response plans, and more nurturing school climates, [and] ensure quality coverage of mental health treatment, particularly for young people,” have been cause for a large amount of recent debate (whitehouse.gov).
We make choices every day, from waking to sleeping our day is composed of choices and the results of these choices. These choices help to shape us to who we are and want to be. But, these results may not be foreseen and may be adverse or favorable depending on the situation. Topics and events in our history ranging from the literacy of common man to unnecessary gun violence were a result of un-foreseen consequences. Our world’s history has been shaped by these consequences forming the world to where we are today.
Some people believe that extremely tight gun control laws will eliminate crime, but gun control laws only prevent the 'good guys' from obtaining firearms. Criminals will always have ways of getting weapons, whether it be from the black market, cross borders, or illegal street sales. New gun control laws will not stop them. Since the shootings of Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, and Sandy Hook, the frequency of mass shootings has increased greatly. Gun control is not effective as it has not been shown to actually reduce the number of gun-related crimes. Instead of considering a ban of private firearm possession, and violating individual ownership rights, it may be more practical to consider the option of partially restricting firearm access.
Gun violence in the United States is higher than ever, and criminals with guns will “…kill as many as 1000 people each day” (Alpers&Wilson). Taking this into perspective, it is only right to fight fire with fire or, in this case, use a gun to protect yourself and those around you. Gun control does not only decrease the ability for protection, it also decreases our rights as U.S citizens. The constitution clearly states that we are given the right to bear arms, meaning we may carry fire arms. Even if we have stricter laws for guns, it will not stop killers from shooting innocent people. These men and women causing damage to the lives of numerous individuals do not care if there is a law banning guns, because all they truly want to do is hurt others. The pain citizens endure every day from losing a family member, friend, or even just a colleague is repulsive. These permanent deaths continue to make people fearful and it causes damage in their lives; unless something is done. Most people agree that action needs to be taken to stop this inhumane cruelty, but the question is; what can be done? Americans need protection, rights, and power to break this inexcusable gun violence circling America. Gun restrictions for trustworthy and reliable gun owners have not been proven to weaken gun violence in the United States; therefore, gun control should be limited because it is only hurting America, not helping it.
One of the most heavily debated subjects today in the United States is guns. Over the last few years, mass shootings and spree shootings have been covered widely in the media. It leaves many Americans wondering how we can just sit by and let this happen. However, this is no easy task to attempt to solve or something that will just go away overnight. Taking away the guns won 't solve anything or just fix the problem as a whole. The United States constitution not only protects, but guarantees the right to bear arms as an American citizen. Why should we let the acts of a few sick and mentally ill ruin the right for the rest of law abiding citizens. The focus should center more around tougher background checks and mental health. Many Americans,
The right to bear arms protects “The Individual” rights from owing a firearm. The modern federal government easily accepted the 2nd Amendment with a widespread agreement that power of the federal government to infringe the Amendment that gives people the right to bear arms. If the government should not have the power to abbreviate from the free right to exercise of religion, than the government should not have the power to abridge the 2nd Amendment right (Lund & Winkler, n.d.). Over the past century, many restriction were supported to prevent criminal from possessing firearms as the law also limits the law-abiding people who respect the law also known as “Honest
The second amendment to the US Constitution shows that it is unconstitutional to have complete and total gun control. The second amendment 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 means that it is the right of an American citizen, abiding by the constitution, has the right to bear arms. Currently, there are over three hundred and seven billion people residing as American citizens. Within the homes of these Americans, forty five percent have a registered gun in their household. As a diverse nation, there are many reasons why there are guns located within a household. Sixty percent stated the gun is used for protection against int...
The right to own a gun has evolved over the years. Owning a gun is not just about possessing it, it’s about knowing you can protect yourself. Every person has the right to protect themselves and feel safe, t...
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.
Supporters of gun control state that to decrease crimes committed with fire arms (which amass a high majority of crimes) guns should be banned from private ownership. This removes guns from the public, therefore taking away the instrument of easily accomplishing crimes. Arthur Kellermann and Donald T. Raey, two gun control advocates, did their own research into the issue and published a discovery of their own; the 43-1 Statistic. In this statistic, Kellerman and Raey state that a gun will be used in a justified shooting one time, while forty three other people are killed by a gun unjustly, either by suicide, accident, or criminal (Heumer 9). According to these two researchers, gun ownership is not worth it. Private ownership of guns saved one life wh...
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.
Living a life in America, we all get to have all the rights that included in the Constitution. One of those was the Second Amendment which is the rights to bear arm, the purpose was to protect ourselves from danger but nowadays a lot of people have take advantage of it and use it in the wrong way. I believe our government need to have a strict limit on guns possession.
There are many reasons that people want to own a gun. One of the main reasons that people own a gun is protection for themselves and their family. In a survey given about guns, “self defense” was the main reason for owning a gun. Guns provide a great source of psychological reassurance even among citizens who are not particularly concerned about the fear of crime of being victimized. The right of self-defense and the right to use firearms for self-defense and the defense of your family is the foundation for rights written in the U.S. constitution.
Central in the arguments against gun control is its ability to restrict any citizen of the United States the right to own guns which is protected under the constitution. Specifically, due recognition is made to its connection to the 2nd Amendment wherein it seeks to protect the individual liberties of people. This facet also applies to gun ownership regardless of the original objective and intention. “The second amendment from the Bill of Rights grants private citizens the right to bear arms. Thus, people who stand firmly against gun control insist that no legislation, technically, should have the right to take away a citizen’s guns without first repealing the amendment in question” (Groberman 1). A good approach to consider in highlighting this part comes from depriving the citizen of his basic right on the basis of specific presumption that it would be used for violence or crim...