One of the most controversial issues in our society today is the power of gun rights versus gun control. For the last few decades, the hot topic as regards to the availability of assorted firearms within the United States of America has been characterized by concerns about a right to bear arms found in the Second Amendment to the U.S Constitution, and the responsibility of government to prevent crime and deaths. The biggest component of the Gun Control debate is whether existing gun laws are sufficient, or whether more gun laws are needed. Supporters of stricter gun control argue that broad gun rights inhibit the government from fulfilling that responsibility. Gun rights supporters promote firearms for self-defense, hunting, and sporting …show more content…
Many gun rights advocates complain that gun control infringes upon their second amendment rights. However, the second amendment says the need for a well regulated militia and does not mention self-defense. It is mentioned that with more guns in circulation around our societies, there is a higher possibility that they fall into the wrong hands and may potentially cause serious harm.
The right to bear arms is a right given to all Americans. We as the American people and the American government cannot infringe that right. However we can make the process of owning a weapon a much more difficult and time consuming process. We as a country should also instate a mental altitude test before the purchase of a firearm. The Government should also instate a surprise mental exam for all firearm owners at least four times per year maybe even more to ensure safety to people surrounding those owners. Americans are a country full of people with free speech and they are not afraid to use it. American people will not let you take away their firearms but if we make it harder to obtain one maybe we cut down on gun violence. We must enforce the process of background checks. The nation should also consider banning the access to own an assault rifle to everyone except for the use of government military only. Assault rifles are not necessary for self- protection and should not be legal under the concealed weapons permit.
The debate over gun control has been raging through the American political systems for years. On one side, there is the National Rifle Association (NRA) and 2nd Amendment-citing citizens who use their firearms for hunting and self-defense. On the other, there is Handgun Control Inc. (HCI) and followers of the Brady Campaign who want to ban guns on the basis that they are dangerous. Both sides have strong arguments, anchored in historical precedent and statistical analysis. Anti-gun control lobbyists’ arguments include the guarantee of the 2nd Amendment, the definition of “militia” as any adult male, self-defense, the relative uselessness of permits and regulations, and court cases in favor of firearm possession. Pro-gun control activists
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.
Death, violence, individual rights, crime, and cost are many words that arise when researching the controversial topic of gun control. This issue revolves around the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and 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.” Is there a black and white answer or is there a need to find a middle ground? The foundational right must be preserved for an individual to own a gun. However, basic safety measures need to be in place for added protection and security of all Americans. To explore why this balance is the best option, it is necessary to look further into the
Countless opinions have been broadcasted on national news media regarding what society ought to do about gun control. This controversial topic sparks many heated debates with people of either position reluctant to compromise. Gun supporters claim that the proposed gun laws infringe on their constitutional right to bear arms. Conversely, others believe that restricted gun access would cause gun violence to decrease. Regardless of what side one stands on, with the increase in gun violence, it is safe to say that something must be done.
America needs to institute, and initiate gun control laws throughout the entire nation. But not everybody who inhabits the United States believes in regulating arms. Those who are against establishing gun laws argue that gun control directly infringes upon their “right to bear arms” granted to them by the 2nd Amendment. Anti gun control supporters, such as the National Rifle Association, often claim that the act of regulating guns is a sufficient reason why such an Amendment was introduced in the constitution; to protect themselves from any and all forms of violation of civil liberties and freedom. Supporters of anti gun laws are unwilling to welcome any interpretations of the 2nd Amendment that do not match up “word for word,” as was written in the Bill of Rights.
There has been an increase in gun sales and conceal and carry permits nearly tripling from 4.7 million to 12.8 million in response to mass shootings like Sandy Hook (Johnson). As time goes on, there has been an increased amount of debates about whether or not the United States should be adding additional regulations to firearms. Some say the U.S. should not because it would be considered as the government infringing on the people’s rights in the words of the Second Amendment: “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 the opposing side, others feel that guns are something that should not be
The continuing Mass Shootings in the United States has caused the gun control debate to intensify. While anti-gun control advocates say the Second Amendment guarantees each individual the right to bear arms, the pro-gun control group reads the Second Amendment as a collective right to bear arms; meaning organized militia are the only ones with that right. This essay will analyse the effectiveness of several different articles which present arguments for and against gun control.
In looking over how gun control single handily affects crime, advocates of gun control continue to argue that restrictions on firearm accessibility, handguns in particular can reduce the rate of firearm-related crimes, suicides, and accidental deaths.. People that oppose gun control argue that it won’t reduce crime, because it would embolden criminals, who manages to secure firearms, to attack citizens whom are to be believed unarmed. When it comes to debating the issue as to whether or not gun control is constitutional, the focus is mainly on the Second Amendment and it’s what it means. Gun-control advocates argue that the Second Amendment refers only to the arming of a State militia and cite court cases that have offered this interpretation. Gun-control opponents maintain that the "right to bear arms" is guaranteed not only to members of a State militia but also to every citizen. In debating whether or not gun ownership is an effective means of self-defense, opponents of gun control use situations where as gun ownership stopped or prevented a crime from happening. Gun- control advocates tend to use statistics that show a gun in the home place is more likely to kill a family member rather than its intended purpose.
The reason why our nation is allowed to bear a large quantity of firearms is due to the Second Amendment of our constitution, which specifically 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." (U.S. Const. am. 2) Because of how vague this amendment is when it comes to law interpretation, it is often used by gun advocates to argue for lenient gun laws. Even though the Second Amendment prevents the federal government from completely banning guns in America, there are still restrictions on the distribution and possession of firearms. Each of the states have their own specific gun laws but generally, a person must obtain a license or permit to purchase or possess a firearm. Also, another thing to note is that all states allow some form of concealed carry, which is carrying a concealed firearm in public. Despite the laws that allow the bearing and distribution of guns, society has multiple viewpoints concerning the usage and appropriateness of the freedom of having the "right to bear arms."
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
Whether you gather your information from the newspaper, radio, or a website, you have certainly been exposed to one of the most controversial, current debates. It seems that the media refuses to stop talking about this topic. In fact, as soon as the press over one event disappears another event seems to revive the debate. Some citizens say that we need more restrictive gun laws. Meanwhile, other Americans say that more guns are what is necessary. It’s impossible to know what the right answer is. However, we can investigate surrounding factors of the matter in order to gain a clearer understanding of the controversy. That being said, I will explain
The debate over stricter gun laws has been ongoing in the United States for quite some time now. Individuals who oppose stricter gun control laws argue that the second amendment to the constitution of the United States constitute part of the bill of rights that protect the right of American citizens to bear arms, and any attempt to set up laws for gun control will be a direct violation of this (Hofstadter 10). They argue that the primary purpose of the amendment was to ensure that American Citizens had the capability to protect themselves against criminal activities and defend the country against external aggression. From a personal perspective, the recent surge in instances of gun violence in the United States of America indicates that stricter gun control laws are necessary for the safety of the American citizenry. Thus, this paper is going to focus on highlighting the benefits of more stringent gun control laws and why members of the public should support it.
Over the last years gun control has become a very widely debated topic. The city, county and state lawmakers seem to be having different stands about the public having easy access to guns. Adam Small states, “After centuries of relative obscurity, the Second Amendment has become the center of an intense academic and legal battle during the last twenty years” (1213). The supporters of gun control and its opponents both claim to have the best interest of this country’s citizens .However, there are private citizens who believe that there should be laws to limit the number of people who own a gun. Even though the United States has enacted laws for regulating firearms, the recent shootings at Aurora movie theatre and Sandy
Gun Control has been a controversy for as long as people can remember. This Controversy has increased recently due to the mass shootings taken place all over the United States. Gun control has its pros and cons, Some believe “Gun control laws state that the Second Amendment was intended for militias; that gun violence would be reduced; that gun restrictions have always existed; and that a majority of Americans, including gun owners, support new gun restrictions.”While others say that the Second Amendment “protects an individual’s right to own guns; that guns are needed for self-defense from threats ranging from local criminals to foreign invaders; and that gun ownership deters crime rather than causes more crime.” To be able to pick a side one must look at the argument from both perspectives, that 's what this paper accomplishes. You must go into detail about this issue and conduct research to form your own opinion.
Multiple political figures and citizens of America believe that the solution to America’s gun issue is to make gun laws more lenient. People believe that if America increases the amount of guns accessible to the average citizen then America’s streets will be safer, and there will be less gun violence. This fact is backed by Most political figures and citizens who want more guns in America, as they want them for one large reason, self defense. To support this, author William J Bennett wrote an article supporting the claim that gun laws should