The Debate on Gun Control and the Second Amendment Essay

Gun control is an extremely controversial issue in the United States, and the debates around this topic has started many decades ago. According to the article “Gun Rights vs. Gun control” by Brianna Gurciullo, these debates are fueled by the people who defend the gun rights and the people who advocate in favor of gun control. It has been difficult to prove that gun ownership is directly related to an increase in violence due to the fact that researches tend to disagree on the impact of gun ownership in the American society. These debates tend to be brought to the spotlight whenever there is a mass shooting in the United States, which according to Abbey Oldham, who is a reporter from the PBS News Hour, happens quite frequently. However, organizations, such as the National Rifle Association (NRA), defend that the laws for gun control violate the Second Amendment of the constitution, which states “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” stated Gurciullo. Due to the distinct interpretations of the constitution and the difficulty to agree on the best approach to tackle the issue, this controversy seem to be almost unsolvable.

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

The US second amendment protects citizens’ right to keep and bear arms. This constitutional provision has brought forth positive and negative implications on social life in the US. The implication of the law is that every person deemed fit under the law is allowed to buy guns of all types and ammunition without limitation. This is a controversial concept in modern democracy. Guns are the cause of most violent crimes and lead to the death of millions around the world. Every war that has been fought in the 20th and 21st centuries has led to investments of billions in the development of better and more effective guns. Every modern conflict, regardless of the geographical location has been fueled by the availability of guns. Businesses that manufacture and sell guns in the US make billions in profits. These profits cannot possibly justify the millions of deaths around the world.

The article “Gun Control Laws: Should the United States adopt stronger gun control laws?” focuses on the debate on passing stricter gun control laws. For example, supporters believe that gun control laws will decrease mass shootings and gun violence. Additionally, adopting these laws does not violate the Second Amendment, and as a result it does not limit the government from the use of fire arms when it is necessary. However, opponents argue that the gun control laws will not stop gun violence. The problem is the people holding the gun and not the gun itself. Furthermore, opponents gathered that stronger gun control laws do violate the Second Amendment. The author illustrates the debate on whether the United States should or should not adopt stronger gun control laws.

Throughout the years there has been an ongoing debate over the Second Amendment and how it should be interpreted. The issue that is being debated is whether our government has the right to regulate guns. The answer of who has which rights lies within how one interprets the Second Amendment. With this being the case, one must also think about what circumstances the Framers were under when this Amendment was written. There are two major sides to this debate, one being the collective side, which feels that the right was given for collective purposes only. This side is in favor of having stricter gun control laws, as they feel that by having stricter laws the number of crimes that are being

Usually when people think about guns they think about crime. But are the two really related? Do guns really lead to crime? And if they do, do laws that restrict firearm ownership and the use of guns stop the crime or protect people? These are the questions many politicians are asking themselves when creating gun control laws. The debate over gun control is nothing new. As you can see this debate still goes on today and is the cause for the beginning of gun control laws.

President Barack Obama says we have an “obligation” to try anything that could save one child, but many people find this statement to be ridiculous. Gun control is thought of as a government policy or regulations to control or limit the sale and use of firearms. In the U.S. constitution, the 2nd 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. Inside America today, gun control is a major issue, especially in the political arena. People debate on the daily that not all things in society make it a safer place to live. The best intentions of America’s lawmakers often do not achieve the desired outcome; therefore, the nation

The Second Amendment to the Constitution says, “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” (Agresti, 2009, para. 2). Based on a simple reading of this, it would seem that people do have the right to own and use firearms. So why are so many people trying to ban guns? Maybe it is because they do not understand what the Second Amendment actually means. Maybe it is because the media only reports the crimes committed with guns and not the lives saved with them. What would happen to the crime rate in the United States if guns were banned altogether as other countries have done? While some people think guns should be banned, it has been

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

Since its creation the firearm has served as man’s best means of self preservation, has helped in the expansion of frontiers, and has served to help many, including Americans, to secure and enforce their rights and maintain democracy. Even today our military uses firepower to prevent the spread of tyranny throughout the world. We refer to our troops as “armed forces” and the necessity of maintaining our firepower has been recognized throughout the human history, which the firearm has helped to shape. The founding fathers of this nation recognized the necessity of arming the average citizen to protect the rights so dearly purchased through armed revolution, and it was these men, all veterans of that revolution, that made it part of our

Gun control has a history dating back to 1791, when the Second Amendment of the Constitution was ratified. However, more recently, the debate over gun control has escalated into a much more public issue to which many citizens can relate. After all, stories about incidents involving guns appear frequently today in newspapers and on television or the radio. One could say that the debate started with the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968, which banned ownership of guns by certain groups of people and regulated the sale of guns. Since then, two main groups have gradually appeared: people who oppose strict federal

One of many controversial topics in the United States is gun control. It is clearly written in the Second Amendment of the Constitution that the people will have the right to bear arms. Recently; however, people have been misusing those firearms and have been harming others with them. The government is trying to regulate the sale, distribution, and ownership of guns because of this reason. Some of the arguments being made by the politicians is simply if the government has the right to be able to control, and if it does, the effectiveness of the public policy to regulate guns.

The second amendment has always been deeply rooted in the American culture and constitution. The amendment 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." Being able to protect ourselves, gives us Americans a peace of mind, but now-a-days people are thinking otherwise. Being able to access a firearm so easily without a thorough deep background/mental health check is un-nerving. In the last two decades there has been roughly 200 mass shootings. All it takes to buy a firearm, like a shotgun simply requires your driver 's license and a couple pages of paperwork from the 4473 form. I am here to discuss Gun control in America through our 3 levels of representation, Federal, State, and City.

The right to bear arms has been cherished by many Americans whom possess firearms. Over time, these guns have been the cause of many murders and social issues. Since 1934, there have been regulations which have created a safer society. This has also caused some sort of controversy among society due to the belief of whether or not this has caused some violation towards their civil rights. Although it has been proven that background checks is an insufficient piece of evidence for not giving someone a gun, the government should still require background checks to purchase ammunition and prohibit the possession of large capacity ammunition magazines because it does not violate the Second Amendment, decreases rates of mass murder, and makes the ability to possess arms more difficult than it is now.

Like almost every right, the Second Amendment is not and was not intended to be completely unlimited. Although it is difficult to identify exactly what the Founding Fathers intended to limit and afford, many concepts can be logically inffered. Additionally, contemporary court cases have attempted to make these limitations more definable. For instance, the federal government prohibited the purchase of handguns by any citizen below the age of 21 in the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. Although an age restriction probably would not have been endorsed by the Founding Fathers, it is currently constitutional due to precedent case ruling.