Gun Control: It's Time To Stop Gun Violence

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 United States is home to approximately 5% of the world’s population and 31% of all mass shootings. Through these mass shootings and various other methods of gun violence, tens of thousands of people die every year. These gun-related deaths primarily originate from murder and children accidentally shooting themselves. Although those in favor of gun control tend to believe that guns should be terminated completely, the second amendment prevents lawmakers from being able to do so. Therefore, in order to combat these causes, alternative gun control solutions must be made for each one. Gun-related murders can be decreased through the use of universal background checks. Additionally, accidental shootings can be minimized through the

The Second 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." This amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms, an interpretation that was supported by the Supreme Court in its 2008 ruling in District of Columbia. V. Heller. This Bill of Right has always been one of the most debatable talking point in the United States for years. Many people did not understand it, others did not pay too much attention, and it was not often used it in court. The Second Amendment is

The interpretation that the Second Amendment provides protection for individual gun ownership is one that was not upheld by the Supreme Court until the 2008 ruling in US v. Heller, in which held that the “Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home” (District of Columbia et. al. v. Heller). For reference the 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.” The argument that this Amendment should only be viewed as serving military purposes was one presented by Justice Stevens in this case. In his dissent, he states that both the “right to… bear arms” and the reference to “militia” in the operative clause “protects only a right to possess and use firearms in connection with service in a state-organized militia.” He then goes on to say that the Amendment never states that guns should be allowed for “the defense of themselves.” It is also interesting to note that in the lobby of the NRA, the operative clause about a “well regulated militia” has been left out in the inscription of the Second Amendment (Waldman). Furthermore,

The Second 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”. The way the Supreme Court interprets this amendment changes constantly because not even the Supreme Court fully understands the limits and rights given to citizens. Some argue that this amendment protects our right to own a gun, but is not very clear. Over the years the second amendment has become a huge debate over gun rights and gun control. This is a cause of all the gun violence this country has been facing for many years and they need a way to help prevent gun violence or even suppress the amount of deaths faced by these tragedies. One of the ways this

The second amendment of the constitution 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.” (Cornell Law) For over fifty years, the amendment has been interpreted to the courts that people individually do not have the right to own gun, but rather that this right is to be regulated by legislatives on the federal,

The Second 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”.1 It is important to understand that the Second Amendment was created in order to allow the American people to form militias in response to a tyrannical government attempting to suppress the American way of life. In order for Americans to form militias, they must uphold their freedom to bear arms as a

Mass shootings are a controversial subject because many do not want to rush into gun control because they could because anxious from any recent mass shootings. Supporters of gun control believe that taking away “assault weapons” would solve this but that word was made up in the wake of these shootings . “Assault Weapons” are made up assault rifles are standard practice for the military as they are fully automatic and have big capacity magazines and are made specifically to do major damage. The “Assault Weapons” many supporters want to ban are known as semi-automatic rifles and have been around since the early days of the war with vietnam. In fact the AR-15 the most popular rifle in America and it was originally developed 60 years ago as defensive weapon and the company that developed it sold the rights to Colt to make fully automatic versions for the military called the M16 but also sold

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution peruses: "A very much managed Militia, being important to the security of a free State, the privilege of the individuals to keep and remain battle ready, might not be encroached." Such dialect has made extensive open deliberation in regards to the Amendment's planned degree. From one perspective, some accept that the Amendment's expression "the privilege of the individuals to keep and remain battle ready" makes an individual established a good fit for nationals of the United States. Under this "individual right hypothesis," the United States Constitution limits authoritative bodies from denying gun ownership, or at any rate, the Amendment renders prohibitory and prohibitive regulation hypothetically

Some could say that it really depends on whom you talk to of how the Second Amendment applies to the current battle over gun control in today’s society. For example, gun rights advocates like the NRA (National Rifle Association) interpret the Amendment to ensure the right of individuals to possess and carry firearms (A Right to Bear Arms?, UMKC School of Law). Gun control advocates such as the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence state that the term “militia” is used elsewhere in the Constitution, and it always refers to the state-organized militia (Tushnet, Interpreting). They believe that the Second Amendment is specifically slated towards the state-organized militia. The Amendment means that the Congress cannot disarm the

The United States of America is a nation of massacres by military-type assault weapons. Aware of the deadliness of these weapons and due to public safety concerns clearly outweighing the benefits of personal ownership of military-type assault weapons, the United States passed the 1994 Federal Ban on military-type assault weapons. This ban was notably effective during the 10 years it was in effect. However, the Ban automatically expired in 2004. Since that time, the number of U. S. mass murders has markedly increased. Attempts to reinstate the Ban, most recently the stricter 2013 Ban, have all failed. Nevertheless, the less restrictive 1994 Ban did pass the Senate and House of Representatives at one point and was successful. Therefore, the 1994 Federal Ban on military-type assault weapons should be reinstated.

The United States contains 5% of the world’s population. However, our nation covers 35-50% of the world’s civilian-owned guns, is ranked first for firearms per capita, and holds the highest homicide rate among all other nations of wealth and democracy at 88.5% (Masters). Such high rates and loose restrictions are bound to lead to tragedy. We will not sit here and make excuses, we will not allow power in the hands of insanity, and we will not allow the safety of our children to be hindered. After each tragedy that has struck, we have failed to successfully improve gun control. As of now, we hold no federal law banning semi-automatic assault weapons, just like the weapons used in the Las Vegas massacre, resulting in

In 2015, 13,367 people lost their lives due to gun violence according to Gun Violence Archive. The Archive also states that out of that number, 693 were children from ages 0-11. We can all agree that there is indeed a problem that we have to address. The solution to that problem, however, has been debated by many. I believe the solution to this problem exists in three parts: Mandatory training and licensing along with more heavily secure gun storage, stricter regulations on the purchasing of a firearm—disabilities and criminal records should be more deeply looked into before transaction—and finally, equipping teachers at highs schools with the right kind of weaponry to prevent mass shootings.

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution 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.” The constitution is clearly saying all citizens have the right to be able to own and carry a weapon or firearm. On June 26, 2008, in District of Columbia v. Heller, the United States Supreme Court held in a 5-4 decision that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home and within federal enclaves (Cornell 1). This is showing how our founding fathers supported the right to bear arms.

The second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right of people to bear arms and was adopted in 1791. It guarantees all Americans "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." It is more described as supporting the natural rights of self-defense, resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defense of the state. Former Chief Justice of the United States, Warren E. Burger writes an essay regarding “The Right To Bear Arms,” that originally appeared in the Parade Magazine in the 1990’s that questions if “The Right To Bear Arms,” is an outdated idea. Burger argument is that the gun control would lower if handguns were lowered. He also talks about the”Militias,” which is an army that protects the security of the state. Our “State Militias,” in our time, serves as a huge national defense.