Americans Should NOT Have The Right To Bear Arms

The following critical analysis of the Essay, “The Second Amendment and the Right to Bear Arms” by Lee Professor of Law at William and Mary Law School, William Van Alstyne, is intended to highlight a few of the different short-comings and argumentative fallacies presented by even the most legally astute individuals who oppose forms of gun control. While the author does present a multi-facet and well-orchestrated presentation of fact and principle, there are two essential claims being asserted on his part. The author’s intent is to demonstrate the importance of gun right protection and to justify the NRA’s practices in the name of doing so. In my dissection of the essay, I intend to demonstrate the argumentative fallacies and examine the ways in which the NRA is generally harmful to the progression of gun control reform, and therefore public safety in the United

The second amendment grants the right to bear arms for all citizens of the United States of America. Recently though, this amendment has come into question because of how people are abusing the rights given to us only to protect us. Instead of using the weapons to help protect America, recently many events have taken place where the right to bear arm has caused more harm than protection. Millions of people have lost their lives because of the lack of strict gun laws. Many of those people are innocent kids, kids who had so much potential all taken away from a gun. The Washington Post, recently posted an opinion piece by Adam Ross called “I’ve had guns pointed at me, I’m glad I didn’t have one.” In the article, Ross relates his personal experience

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

Imagine waking up in the middle of the night to a complete stranger who is in your house, threatening to harm you, and your family, and you cannot do anything about it. Imagine, not being able to go target shooting or hunting, because there are laws passed to prevent you from owning a firearm. The truth is, more and more people in this country are trying to restrict law-abiding people from owning firearms due to the overwhelming rise in gun related crimes. As law abiding citizens, the constitution gives us the right to bear arms. Whether it is for recreation or protection,

The opposite side of this debate consists of those who claim that the amendment guarantees some sort of individual right to arms. This view comes from the literal wording of the Second Amendment, which states, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Along with this argument, the NRA and other groups in opposition of gun control argue that the first, fourth, ninth, and tenth amendments are all constructed to refer to the citizens as individuals and not as a collective state. These gun advocates feel that if one is to give a rational interpretation of the collective view to the constitution, then one would have to assume that the Framers referred to the individuals in the first, fourth, and ninth amendments; to the states in the second amendment, and then separated the states and the people in the tenth amendment, although they feel that this was inconsistent with the wording of the second amendment (5).

Even if a child is well behaved and listens when they are told not to touch

Some Americans feel that because guns are already regulated in so many other countries, America should just follow suit, while others believe guns both represent and help guarantee our independence, our liberty, and our freedom to make our own decisions. The founding fathers anticipated that gun control could become a serious issue in the future, so they added the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The Second 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.“ Most gun control activists focus in isolation on the beginning of the amendment where the founders wrote that a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state. They then try to argue that only the military or the National Guard should have access to guns, not individuals. In so arguing, however, they completely ignore the last part of the Second Amendment, which provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The founders obviously envisioned that the people would keep and use firearms to protect themselves and their country. Unfortunately many politicians don’t see it that way. Yet, the Supreme Court has struck down firearm bans again and again. The 2008 Supreme Court case, District of Columbia vs. Heller,

In 2016, Greg Jones wrote an article titled “The Real Reason Americans Oppose Gun Control.” In the article, Jones informs the audience why Americans refuse to give up their Second Amendment rights to our tyrannical government. In the article, Jones adds explanation to three main reasons why Americans will not give up their Second Amendment rights. First, Jones says that “The Crazies Get Guns, But Not Us,” Jones is implying that even if the government would bad guns, criminals will still have access. The government banned drugs, but the streets of the United States are still flooded with them. Second, Jones explains that the Second Amendment was not created by the founding fathers for just hunting purpose, but for protection against the government.

In 2010, in the decision McDonald v. Miller, the U.S. Supreme Court formally incorporated the second amendment of the U.S. Constitution through the fourteenth, and in so doing officially applied the District of Columbia v. Heller decision to the states (McDonald v. Chicago, 2010). The opinion of the case authored by Justice Samuel Alito based its principal argument on the claim that the “right to bear arms” was not only a right guaranteed to the individual, but also a “fundamental right” in the U.S. constitution (U.S. Const. amend. II. and McDonald v. Chicago, 2010). Gun control and gun rights in the United States based on the second amendment have been a subject of intense debate only relatively recently with the emergence of groups such as the National Rifle Association and the Brady Campaign (in class notes). These initiatives have shaped public opinion on guns and spurred countless debates among scholars, judicial figures, and citizens over the meaning and purpose of the second amendment. In light of these arguments and conflicts between those employing collective theory to understand the amendment and those interpreting the right to “bear arms” as pertaining purely to an individual, it is not surprising that gun control and regulation in the United States continues to motivate such passionate defenses and condemnations (U.S. Const. amend. II and Cornell, 2010). These two arguments regarding the meaning and intent of the second amendment present significantly different interpretations. While those who advocate for collective theory argue that the amendment protects only the right of individual to use “arms” in

In the Bill of Rights in the II Amendment, “The right of people to keep and bear arms.” Gun control is slowly changing the II Amendment. “Protect and defend the bill of rights, including the freedom of religion, speech, press and right to bear arms.” (Donald J. Trump). The Bill of Rights should not be mended or made into variations. Gun Control goes against the II Amendment making it harder and harder to get a gun. As a country, we need to defend the Bill of Rights and follow every Amendment including the right to bear

For years, people of all social statuses have argued whether the right to bear arms should remain, be restricted or completely prohibited. The debate has escalated in the past few years, so far as to play a huge role in the recent presidential election, and has divided the country even more. Those who support the idea of controlling firearms believe that it will reduce the amount of crimes committed with a firearm, resulting in the death of at least one individual involved, as well as suicides. Those opposing the idea believe that gun control will reduce citizens’ protection against assailants along with taking away the right granted to all American citizens in the constitution. Whether the right to bear arms is restricted or not, there will

Taking away guns from a country boy is like taking candy from a kid, it’s just not right! More often than not there are posts on social media about how “Obama is taking my guns.” Furthermore, Obama is not going to take your guns! President Obama talked about creating a stricter, safer environment. This topic often gets people fired up. Have you ever heard someone say that it is their right to own guns? They are referring to the Second Amendment and the Right to Bear Arms.

“The Second Amendment isn’t there for duck hunting, its there to protect us from tyrannical government and street thugs,” states the British journalist Piers Morgan. When the United States Constitution it wasn’t put into place so people can hunt or participate in shooting games, it was so we didn’t give the government too much power. Putting a law about gun control into place will give the government the power it needs to turn into a tyranny and us the people wouldn’t have any way to protect ourselves. If we were to allow the government to place a law restricting the ability to bear arms we would be sacrificing things like our self-defense, the right to hunt and sport shooting, and finally

Have you ever thought about our right to bear arms? The second amendment of the Constitution states that we Americans have the right to carry guns. I agree with our nation’s founding fathers. We do have a right to bear arms.

“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” (Bill of Rights). This is the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution. This is a document that grants all Americans certain inalienable rights. All citizens no matter their age or standing in society have some understanding of the Bill of Rights and the freedoms that it allows. One freedom that is granted to us, the right to bear arms, has become the center of a heated issue in today’s society and many years before. The majority of citizens have felt the impacts of guns, either positive or negative, during some point of their life. It is because of the fact that guns are a part of