Gun control laws aim to restrict or regulate firearms by selecting who can sell, buy and possess certain guns. Criminals do not obey laws and stricter gun control laws or banning guns will have little effect on reducing crimes. There are many myths about gun control reducing acts of gun violence, which are simply not true according to research. People are responsible for the crimes, not the guns themselves. Taking guns away from United States citizens that use them for many reasons, shooting practice, competition, hunting and self-defense, should not be punished for the acts of criminals. As stated by Mytheos Holt, “Guns in the right hands help public safety. Guns in the wrong hands harm public safety”. Research shows that defensive use of guns discourages criminals and reduces crime (Holt 2). Not only is it wrong to penalize law-abiding citizens, it is against the Second Amendment. It is unconstitutional to pass laws that infringe on the Second Amendment right to bear arms.
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...
... middle of paper ...
...ews. Yahoo!, 23 Apr. 2013. Web. 11 Oct. 2013.
Kleck, Gary. "Guns and Self-Defense by Gary Kleck, Ph.D." Guns and Self-Defense by Gary Kleck, Ph.D. Web. 04 Oct. 2013.
Levy, Robert. "Cato Institute." National Law Journal (2013): n. pag. Cato Institute. Web. 09 Oct. 2013.
MacBradaigh, Matt. "Makes Clear Guns Aren't Just for the Military." PolicyMic. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Oct. 2013.
Pavlich, Katie. "Arkansas to Allow Teachers to Carry Guns at School." Townhall.com. N.p., 01 Aug. 2013. Web. 17 Oct. 2013.
Sager, Josh. "Refuting Anti-Gun Control Arguments." The Progressive Cynic. N.p., 12 Jan. 2012. Web. 17 Oct. 2013.
Tucci, Peter. "The Daily Caller." The Daily Caller. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Oct. 2013.
Zhao, Emmeline. "Guns In Schools: Firearms Already Allowed In 18 States With Few Restrictions." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 15 Jan. 2013. Web. 17 Oct. 2013.
Richman, Sheldon. "The Seen and Unseen in Gun Control." The Freeman 1 Oct 1998: 610-611
DeMillio, A. D. (2013, July 30). Guns in school: Ark. district arming more than 20 teachers,
One reason teachers should not be able to carry guns because guns are currently illegal in schools; Guns are illegal because they are dangerous. The Gun Free School Zone Act (GFSZA) is a federal law that was accepted in the United States in 1990. According to the GFSZA, “It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.” In order for teachers to carry guns, we would have to discard this law. Also, the school board would have to create a new policy, allowing teachers to carry guns. Adjusting the rules would be time consuming and confusing. Changing the GFSZA would make students tense and distract children from learning. Citizens from CNN Politics say, “72.4% of educators said they would be unlikely to bring a firearm to school if allowed to do so.” This data shows that the majority of teachers do not even want possession of a gun in the classroom. School officers have the right to carry guns, teachers should just focus on education. Not only does it create a huge responsibility, there would also need to be a large financial investment to supply guns for every school. This money would be hard to come up with, and not everyone is in favor of sacrificing money for firearms.
“I don’t believe people should be able to own guns. (Obama)” This said prior to Obama’s presidency, in the 1990’s, is still a topic that is constantly questioned today. Many American’s feel the need to seek ownership of weapons as a source of protection; While others believe that private ownership of guns will do nothing more but heighten the rate of violence due to people taking matters into his or her own hands. Philosophy professor Jeff McMahan agrees with Obama’s statement in regard to the ownership of guns. In his New York Times editorial titled “When Gun ‘Control’ Is Not Enough,” McMahan provides evidence to support his theory of the dangers that quickly follow when allowing the community to own guns legally. McMahan, throughout the text, shows responsible reasoning and allows the reader the opportunity to obtain full understanding and justifies his beliefs properly.
In "Just Take Away Their Guns," author James Q. Wilson argues that "Legal restraints on the lawful purchase of guns will have little effect on the illegal use of guns" (Wilson 63). Wilson points out that it would be tough to remove all legally purchased guns from the streets and nearly impossible to confiscate illegally purchased guns. Gun advocate J. Warren Cassidy argues that "The American people have a right 'to keep and bear arms'. This right is protected by the Second Amendment to the Constitution. . ." in an article titled "The Case for Firearms" (Cassidy 275). James B. Jacobs and Kimberly A. Potter wrote in an article called "Keeping guns out of the "wrong" hands: the Brady law and limits of regulations" that "US law enforcement should concentrate on stiff sentences for crimes committed with guns and recognize that gun control laws do not keep guns from the wrong people" (Jacobs and Potter 1 of 27). Daniel B. Polsby, author of "The false promise: gun control and crime," simply states, "Gun control laws don't work" (Polsby 1 of 11). Polsby feels that "gun control laws are ineffective because [they] have not been proven to be a deterrent to crime" (1 of 11). James D. Wright states, in his article "Second Thoughts about Gun Control," that "If there were fewer guns around, there would also be less crime and less violence" (Wright 93). More gun control laws will only make it a hassle for law abiding citizens to purchase guns. They will not keep guns out of the criminal's hands because they have other methods of obtaining guns, such as the secondary market which is the illegal sale of firearms. Another reason why more gun control legislation will backfire is that those who want to purchase guns to protect themselves a...
Ring, Ray. “Guns R Us.” High Country News (Paonia, Co) Vol. 39, No. 14 Aug. 6 2007:10-17. Sirs Issues Researcher. Web. 6 Oct. 2015.
Severson, Kim, and Alan Blinder. "Guns at School? If There's A Will, There Are Ways." LexisNexis Academic. LexisNexis, 28 Sept. 2013. Web. 31 Mar. 2014.
Rauch, Jonathan. “The Right Kind of Gun Rights.” National Journal Vol. 40 Issue 11. Academic Search Complete. 15 Mar. 2013. Web. 6 June 2015.
Fields, Gary. "New Washington Gun Rules Shift Constitutional Debate." Wall Street Journal. 17 May. 2010: A. 1. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 22 Apr. 2014.
“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.
Johnson, Fawn. "The Silver Lining in the Gun-Control Defeat." National Journal. (2013): Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Web 31 Oct. 2013
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. The United States government is attempting to reduce violent crime by controlling the amount of guns on the market, who is allowed to purchase a gun, and what type of gun a person is allowed to purchase. The only people affected by gun control laws are the law-abiding citizen that should be allowed to purchase firearms without the government’s interjection.
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
Listverse,. '10 Arguments For Gun Control - Listverse '. N.p., 2014. Web. 30 Oct. 2014.
The 2nd amendment states that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. “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” (Amendment II). The founding fathers put the 2nd amendment in the Bill of Rights because they knew if the government was able to take it away, they would get too powerful. Gun control laws that are proposed for the near future infringe upon the people’s rights to own a gun. More restrictions would only make it harder for law abiding citizens to own a gun. Criminals will always have guns, and gun control only infringes the rights of people who wish to acquire guns the legal way. A prime example of this is the city of Chicago. “Gun shops are illegal in Chicago. The city has bans on both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. And yet each week people continue to die in the streets from gunshot wounds” (Granderson). Chicago has some of the strictest gun control of the nation, but they are also the murder capital of the nation. If gun control works wouldn’t this be the opposite? Many would argue that...