Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
What is the real cause of mass shootings
Gun control in America today
Gun control in America today
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: What is the real cause of mass shootings
For decades the second amendment was simply known as the right to bear arms. People looked at it as a staple of our country and never truly thought to undermine it. However, in today’s world the right to bear arms has come into considerable question. The conversation of gun regulation is so topical that it has created a divide across our country. It seems there is no right answer considering pro gun supporters claim, “without guns we are unprotected from gunmen,” and citizens against guns claim, “you’re only adding fuel to the fire.” Enforcing the current gun laws and regulations would virtually put an end to these talks. Numerous gun regulations are currently being ignored and have led to many deadly tragedies. The gun control laws that we already have need to be enforced. Misuse of firearms prosecutions has lessened by 35%. Out of 76,000 purchase applications that were denied, only 62% were referred for prosecution and only 44% were prosecuted. (Licata) Implementing more gun control laws will not help our situation if we are not enforcing the ones we already have in place. The gun control laws they are trying to put in place, such as banning certain weapons and larger magazine capacities, does no good when the criminals will still …show more content…
It’s actually embarrassing for a nation that it’s second amendment has to be this highly questioned because people can’t follow rules. While the biggest culprits of this entire topic are obviously the deadly criminals, it’s hard to pin it all on them. Perhaps if the current background checks that are in place were properly conducted some of these shootings may have never taken place. I truly think that changing any of the current regulations or laws would be considered a high injustice on the backbone of this nation. The citizens that follow the rules and use guns for target practice, hunting, and
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.
With all the shootings and random acts of violence, such as the shooting at the movie theatre in Colorado, or the Sandy Hook shootings, stricter gun control laws have been a hot topic in politics and the national mainstream media. The government thinks that gun control being stricter would help to make less of these tragic incidents occur. I am against this thought because I believe that the law-abiding citizens will be the only ones to give up their guns and criminals will then have an upper hand on the innocent. Even though banning guns is supposed to save lives, cities such as Chicago have already shown that stricter gun laws should not be passed because violent murders are still prevalent in these types of cities and stricter gun laws have not worked like they were supposed to. Stricter gun laws simply will not work because the law-abiding citizens will be the only ones to follow the rules.
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.
Should the 2nd amendment be revoked or changed? Many Americans would say “No,” stating that guns are dangerous and times have changed. Others might argue that having the right to bear arms keeps people safe and less threated by the outside world. In this debate, both sides of the 2nd amendments constitutional rights will be argued. The upcoming presidential election has been influencing voters to revoke our 2nd amendment rights which could change the democracy on which our country was founded.
The debate over the right to bear arms according to the Second Amendment has been a hotly contested issue for many years in American history. The matter has been one of the most controversial issues in the second half of the twentieth century and into the twenty-first; disputed between politicians on the liberal and conservative side along with issues such as abortion, capital punishment, and gay marriage. The Supreme Court has officially defined the controversial Second Amendment by stating that states have the right to maintain a militia separate from a federally controlled army (Gale Encyclopedia, pg. 155-162). However, “Courts have consistently held that the state and federal governments may lawfully regulate the sale, transfer, receipt, possession, and use of certain categories of firearms, as well as mandate who may and may not own a gun (Gale Encyclopedia, pg. 155-162).” Therefore, the issue is one that is extremely hard to clarify. Which side is right?
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.
Written on December 15, 1791 was the second amendment of the constitution. It 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."(Cite)? United States citizens have used guns for various reasons that include protection, hunting, and sporting reasons. The topic on gun control is a very complex topic that is discussed daily. It is such a big issue that it has both the democrats and republicans firmly established in their positions. One of the main reasons this has been such an important topic in recent years is because of all the murders and massacres that have happened recently in the United States. As our newly nominated president, Donald
Although the Second Amendment prevents the federal government from completely banning guns in America, limited restrictions are allowed on the distribution and possession of firearms. Certain groups of people such as criminals, the mentally unstable, and soldiers dishonorably discharged from the military are prohibited from possessing or interacting with firearms (Flynn). These restrictions are enforced by background checks in some states on both a state and federal level. However, gun laws vary from state to state and are often not thorough enough; the background checks are flawed due to lack of information and misinformation, and guns can easily end up in the hands of criminals and malevolent individuals. The ease of obtaining a firearm in America fosters crime and a dangerous environment. Hence, the Second Amendment should be reinterpreted so that stricter gun laws can be implemented because modern citizens do not require guns, current background checks are flawed, gun...
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...
by President Reagan). This banned automatic weapons with magazines for 10 years but that expired in 2004 and was never put back into action(Gun Control Laws). Though many attempts of gun control have failed there is even more of a push for a reform now. The National Rifle Association (NRA) is a major foundation that supports the second amendment and has a lot of pull when it comes to political parties. The NRA is wealthy and has overturn and won many cases against guns. According to Megan Cassella “Fifty percent of those surveyed said they supported Obama 's executive actions”(Cassella). Almost all that were supporting the democratic party supported this idea of tightening gun laws, while nearly seventy-two percent of republicans opposed stricter gun laws. There is .
Along with many other reasons, guns do not need any more restrictions. No one seems to be taking into account all of the other means of deaths and the death tolls of those actions. Many of the murders in the United States are committed with a variety of resources such as hammers and clubs, drugs, and even vehicles. According the FBI crime files, in 2006 the amount of deaths executed with clubs and hammers were 618, meanwhile the amount of murders rifles were used in was only 438 (Hawkins, “FBI: More People killed…”). This clearly portrays that rifles are not as much of a problem as it may seem. It shows that something so simplistic and common can cause more deaths than a sophisticated rifle. No matter what the weapon may be, simple or complex,
The US constitution clearly states and has stated for the last 225 years 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.” There was controversy over this amendment, up until 2008 if this meant that a United States citizen had the right to own firearms for protection or only for those of a militia to be armed and maintain, it was decided then that the second amendment protected an individual 's’ rights to own firearms unconnected to any militia. With that being said for 225 years, Americans have bought, sold, and shot firearms. Americans shoot guns for a recreational sport every single day. Every day 91 Americans are killed
For years proposals for gun control and the ownership of firearms have been among the most controversial issues in modern American politics. The public debate over guns in the United States is often seen as having two side. Some people passionately assert that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own guns while others assert that the Second Amendment does no more than protect the right of states to maintain militias. There are many people who insist that the Constitution is a "living document" and that circumstances have changed in regard to an individual’s right to bear arms that the Second Amendment upholds. The Constitution is not a document of total clarity and the Second Amendment is perhaps one of the worst drafted of all its amendments and has left many Americans divided over the true intent.
The debate over gun control in America has constantly brought up over the years due to gunmen killing large amounts of civilizations in shootings. From Columbine to Sandy Hook or the shootings of the two reporters in West Virginia, these public shootings are occurring everywhere. Lawmakers and civilians alike are pushing for increased gun control in hopes of preventing the same tragedies. Anybody that has been affected by the shootings have been pushing Congress and state governments to force new sanctions on government. With the past three years, Congress has shot down all the laws despite the large amounts of public support. Adding more gun control isn’t going to stop the mass shootings from happening.
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...