Arguments Against The Second Amendment

Didn't that happen after the American government took the Lokota's guns from them after promising them no harm would come to them? Of course in more modern times there was Waco, where our government bombed a religious community and ultimately killed 82 of its members, including women and children ..... Our government is not to be trusted and that is the very reason our founding fathers wrote the 2nd amendment so "We the People" can keep a check and balance on "We the People's" government

Did you know from 1950 to 2016 98% of all public mass shootings were committed in gun free zones? I believe that the second amendment is important because, it gives you a right to protect yourself and your family. Guns save lives and lower crime rates. Banning assault rifles won’t do much to help lower crime or stop mass shootings.

The Second Amendment states that people have the right to bear arms, but this is one of the most controversial and most-debated amendments. This is due to the fact that guns are dangerous, and are not always only used for self-defense. Guns have been used to kill children and faculty in schools, to violently make a political statement, and to threaten and scare citizens. Yet, the Second Amendment still stands. In a recent case, the Supreme Court interpreted the Second Amendment.

I do and always will believe in the second amendment. People have the right to own and carry guns with them wherever they go. People have the right to own guns for hunting purposes and putting food on the table to feed their family, and they also have the right to carry a gun with them for self defence and keep in the house to protect their family. It is and always will be my belief that people have the right do whatever it is that they want to do when it comes to

In my opinion, the second amendment should stay the same and not be changed. People should have the right to have guns. What was the point of making that an amendment if we are just going to change that? For instance, if someone were to be out in the middle of nowhere I believe they should be able to have a gun on them because there are strange people in the world and you never know what could happen. Even if we were to try to get rid of all of the guns people would probably hide some and the people without them would then be in danger. I think that guns are used because they also help people not only protect people from others, but also from the wild or just to go out and hunt some animals for some food.

Written in 1789 by James Madison, the Second Amendment is one that most passionate Americans today are very quick to defend or argue against. The Second Amendment is one of the most controversial and complex amendments in the Bill of Rights. One of those debates includes the actual meaning behind James Madison’s contradictory sentence. The question that often rises is was the Second Amendment created for the protection of the all people or solely for the establishment of a centralized military. The Second Amendment has undergone several changes which established stricter regulations and more clarification but however it is ultimately still controversial in modern society as it is unclear in wording and meaning.

As a solution of this problem, since amendment can be changed then, the federal and state government should have a election for this law in the senate and house of representatives. Otherwise, it owing gun for safety is never going to reduce the number of death happening in every second. If people votes for banning gun totally then, it is a great solution. Only the army and the police can have the gun to protect the people and society. If people votes for second amendment then, in order to reduce the amount of death, government have to make the laws more stricker and logical laws. They should make the age requirement much longer which is going to convert 21 from 18. Otherwise, the younger generation will become killer. In my opinion, America

We need to keep the second amendment the same and not change one thing to it. If we didn’t have the guns then we can’t defend ourselves. People want to change the amendment to where we can’t buy guns as easy, and they want to try changing it to where we got to have license to own one. If we keep the amendment the same then we can protect ourselves from any danger: “The first is that the amendment was meant to ensure that individuals have the absolute right to own firearms” (Mount, 2011). This means that we should have it to where we have the right to own guns and to keep it easier to buying and shooting them. Another reason, the military has guns, and they need them to fight: “The second is that the amendment was meant to ensure that 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.” This is the second amendment, the right to bear arms. Throughout history, it has been, seen as one of the most controversial and significant pieces of text in the United States Constitution with many debating over its meaning, context, and role in modern society. Since its ratification, Americans have been arguing over the amendment's meaning and interpretation. One side interprets the amendment to mean it provides for collective rights, while the opposing view is that it provides individual rights. Although the meaning of the second amendment continues to be a hot-button issue for both sides of the aisle one thing is certain, the role that it plays in the American way of life and the lives that it has affected remains a critical aspect of

The second amendment in the constitution states that, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” There are some individuals that stand with the constitution, and believe that the government officials confiscate firearms because the constitution says it is not permitted. On the other side of this issue, other people believe that due to the amount of gun violence there needs to be action taken on what guns can be purchased, and who can be granted the responsibility to own firearms.

Ever since the Bill of Rights was passed in 1791 the right of the people to keep and bear arms has played a factor in the United States history. Sides have been taken and people have fought over the interpretation of the Second Amendment. Everybody has an opinion on every topic that has ever come up. While opinions can vary, there can be some common grounds for viewpoints. Commonly, the Second Amendment is looked at as a two-sided issue; (1) Citizens should be allowed to own and carry firearms and (2) Citizens should not be allowed to own and carry firearms. But in looking at a community of people who own firearms, it is evident that even in what seems to be a two sided argument has room for many different positions on one side

The First Amendment gives us the right to free speech and religious practices. The Westboro Baptist Church has been the center of attention and protest for a long period of time based on so many things. For example they will protest at gay people’s funerals and the example above protesting at a military funeral. I don’t think that they should be able to protest at private events such a military funerals and personal matters in general no matter if it may be their rights or not. Unfortunately it has been ruled that they are able to protest freely and are protected because of their constitutional rights. It is great that these people can protest and say whatever they may feel but I do think there should be some type of restriction as to where

"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 second amendment has been the subject to much political disagreements and controversy. It was written and ratified in December 1791 (Brooks “The Second Amendment & the Right to Bear Arms”). There are many who want to repeal “the right to bear arms” because they feel they feel that is why criminals get a hold of weapons so easily. Others say that citizens should have access to their own weapons and protection. Even more political controversy has arisen due to the mass shooting that took place in Las Vegas, Nevada last week-end leaving more wanting to revoke the second amendment. In spite of this, I have been brought to the conclusion that the second amendment should not be redacted because, some rely on hunting as an income, citizens have a right to defend themselves, and citizens have a right to defend their freedom.

The gun debate in the United States widely revolves around the intended interpretation of the Second Amendment. Those who support gun rights claim that the founding fathers developed and subsequently ratified the Second Amendment to guarantee the individual’s right to keep and bear arms. Those who want more stringent gun laws feel that the founding fathers directed this Amendment solely to the formation of militias and are thus, outdated.

We have had several of the worst mass shootings in our nation's history in quick succession over the past few years. Certain legal restrictions and acts from our government could have prevented numerous deaths. Common sense background checks and limitations to cartridge size and assault weapons would surely have saved many lives at the Las Vegas Massacre, but certain men and women claim that these restrictions violate their second amendment right. They claim that guns aren't the problem. That guns don't kill people, people kill people. So limiting access to devastating guns is just avoiding the problem. The Second Amendment right presumably violated by common sense gun control is “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” (Second Amendment). The Second Amendment states that for the need of a well regulated militia to protect the security of the free state and the right for the people to keep and bear arms. Militias have been inactive for decades so in a sense the intent of the amendment is no longer relevant. Based on the 2nd Amendment, the Constitution is not still a valuable and viable document in modern America because it stands in the way of thorough background checks, training courses, and its vague wording and absolute intent make it inefficient to maintain peace and order and should be amended “To the People of the United