Running Head: GUN CONTROL VS. GUN RIGHTS Gun Control vs. Gun Rights By Robert Marlow For CJ 450 Senior Seminar Dr. Michael Eskey Park University September 2009 Abstract Gun control and gun rights have been an issue that has been debated for decades. Whenever there has been a mass shooting of any magnitude, it seems that the debate heats up even more. Consideration must be given as to what the benefits are of these gun control laws. Gun control laws must also be written as to not violate the Second Amendment of the Constitution as well. There have been many studies accomplished to determine if gun control laws actually do reduce the amount of violent crimes. These studies have discovered that there is no link …show more content…
This right is the Second Amendment and it 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.” (Supreme Court of the, 2008) As with everything else within our Constitution, this right is left largely open to interpretation. As it reads, it leaves the question as to only a regulated Militia has the right to keep and bear arms, not the average citizen. Others have interpreted as everyone has the right to bear arms, not just a regulated militia. Over the years, it has been left up to the Supreme Court to determine what the true meaning of this right really is. For the most part, the Supreme Court decided that everyone had the right to bear arms. This particular right went unchallenged until the high court received the case of District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008. This case came to the high court because a police officer that lived in Washington D.C. could not have a handgun while off duty due to the gun control law that was in place. Washington D.C.’s gun control law stated that “all lawfully possessed guns to either be stored disassembled or with a trigger lock in the home” ("The Case for," 2007) violated the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state militia, but who still want to keep handguns, along with other firearms for personal use in their homes. The court held “that the Second Amendment protects an
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” (Second Amendment).
Gun control is a vital necessity to the welfare of our nation. Many people out there are supporting the “anti- gun control cause” with the excuse of “self-defense”. I believe that not everyone will handle a gun for self-defense. The possession of a gun is a sign of power. One of the bigger ambitions that one has is to have power and the easier it is to obtain a gun; the faster a criminal will gain power over an innocent person. When one is in possession of a gun, that person has complete control of their actions and may act upon the weapon however the person may please even if they know that their action will cause harm to defense-less people. There are many deaths caused by guns out there that could
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 2nd amendment of the constitution maybe one of the most infamous and controversial modification of the charter. The 2nd amendment protects a citizen’s right to keep and bear arms the law states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, and shall not be infringed.” (“Second amendment” n.d.). The American Bar Association (“Bill of Rights” 1791) has stated that “there is more disagreement and less understanding about this right than of any other current issue regarding the Constitution. It is a confusing right and can be inferred in many ways and is interpreted accordingly with each case. The definition of the right to keep and bear arms is one of the most argued amendments in the constitution because some state the right refers to militia and their right of bearing arms to uphold and protect the security of a free nation when needed. While others believe the amendment gives each and every individual the right to keep and bear arms. However one construes the amendment, it has been a great topic of concern, argument and debate, ever since it has been ratified.
“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. This line taken from the 2nd Amendment states to all who live under the governing power of the Bill of Rights as well as the Constitution of the United States of America, that their right to own and to operate a weapon can’t be taken away. It is a privilege to be able to bear arms, as some countries do not have the right to do so. We must understand that the 2nd Amendment is as important as any other amendment and we must protect our right to bear arms.
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” (The United States Constitution). Most gun
People’s right to bear arms and their ability to purchase them should not be restricted, as it is the individual’s right to bear arms made undeniable by the U.S. Constitution. While there has been much debate over the meaning of the clause, “a well regulated militia” DC vs Heller, the supreme court case in 2009 ruled this to be an individual right.
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 U. S. 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" (United States of America).
Although many may argue that it is our Constitutional right to bear arms which therefore cannot be infringed upon, ultimately this statement holds a fallacy in that the Second Amendment within the Bill of Rights 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.” A militia, by definition, is a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency. There is no statement within the Second Amendment holding the fact that any civilian, licensed or not licensed to carry, cannot have this right revoked in any daily life situation. The Second Amendment clearly states that only when necessary in emergence may a well regulated militia hold the right to bear arms. Are we, as citizens of the United States holding this fallacy because we believe we need such power, or do we hold such power because we believe this fallacy.
According to The Second Amendment of the Constitution, the citizens of the United States have the right to own and bear arms, in order to form a well-regulated militia for the security of the states. This right has been discussed for decades as an important issue for the American society, and it has been one of the most controversial issues in the second half of the twentieth century until nowadays. This right germinated with the threat to freedom that the standing army of professional soldiers brought to the Americans. Some argued that the right to bear arms is mainly concerned with self-defense while others argued that this right was implemented to avoid militia disarmament and protect the Free State. This right was
The right to keep and bear arms was considered a fundamental, individual right in the original 13 colonies from the pre-Revolutionary period through the ratification of the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution in 1791. 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. The right to keep and bear arms has been a topic of extreme controversy in this century and can be argued equally from both sides. The first side says that it is our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. On the flip side, it is too dangerous and would increase the number of violent crimes. No matter which side is
The second amendment states “ The right of the people to keep and bear arms”. What does that mean to us, basically and person in the United States is allowed to own and keep a fire arm in house. Gun control advocates believe that right does not extend to ownership of military-style firearms that are otherwise known as assault weapons. To curb gun-related violence certain checks are made, such as mandatory child safety locks, background checks on those wishing to purchase a gun, limits on the number of guns a person can buy and raising the age limit for gun ownership. Gun rights groups, led by the National Rifle Assocation, argue that these and other proposals infringe on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. They maintain
Heller, the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm to use for lawful purposes, such as defending oneself within their home/property. The court case ruled that the Amendment was not connected to service in a militia (Constitution). Handgun possession is banned under District of Columbia law. This law prohibits the registration of handguns and makes it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm; additionally, all lawfully owned firearms must be kept unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock unless they are being used for lawful recreational activities or located in a place of business.
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.