Anti Gun Debate

The right to possess guns is a fundamental element to American identity. The right to own and operate guns under certain circumstances is in fact guaranteed as part of the United States Constitution. Over the course of American history and particularly in the 21st century, there exists a great debate over the possession of guns of private citizens. Both sides of the debate argue with fervor. There are those that argue fervently for the right to possess arms; they argue for guns with regard to home protection, property protection, personal security, and that it is a fundamental right as a citizen.

The term ‘gun control’ is used to show the regulation of selling, owning and use of guns. This means there is going to be a lot of controversy regarding this, making it a very touchy topic for a lot of people in the world right now. Gun control laws vary greatly, for example in places like the United Kingdom, where the gun laws are so strict that even police officers aren’t allowed to use them. Only special task forces within the police departments are. Compared to places like the United States, where there isn’t a federal gun control law in place anymore. Opponents argue that it is unconstitutional to take away kind of gun from an American citizen. They also argue that it is not the guns that commit these horrible crimes, but instead it’s the people behind the guns that commit them. But a gun is a tool that can be used for good intentions or evil intentions. And in most cases, the bad ones have a heavier effect or outcome. The US should enforce strict national gun control laws that will in the end help save the lives of men, women and children because if they do not, they will be seeing more tragedies through the country just like the one that had happened at Sandy Hook Elementary.

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.

The gun control issue has recently created a massive uproar throughout the U.S. due to some major horrific events such as the Virginia Tech shooting in 2007, where 32 people were killed, the Sandy Hook shooting in 2012 where 27 people were killed, mostly children, and the Columbine shooting in 1999 where 13 people were killed, (CNN) as well as many others. To some, it is a crime issue, to others it’s a right’s issue. It is, obviously, a safety issue, an education issue, a racial issue, and a political issue, among others, and within each of these issues there are those who want more gun control, the Democrats, and those who

In the discussion of gun control, one of the main controversial issues is whether or not there should be more or less regulations put on firearms. In addition, another issue that comes up is whether or not those regulations will have a benefit on society. One one hand, gun regulation proponents believe that stricter regulations restricting the types of firearms and ammunition that can be purchased will reduce the amounts of crimes and make society safer. One the other hand, gun regulation opponents argue that stricter regulations infringe on the rights of citizens and only endanger society more. So what is the answer to the question? Should there be stricter

Jill Silos-Rooney’s current professional associations include Bethel Woods Center for the Arts., MassBay Community College, and Oxford University Press. She begins her article, “The Top 3 Liberal Arguments for Gun Control”, with an anecdote about a nine-year-old girl who accidentally killed her gun instructor with an Uzi and proceeds to list off two counterarguments and rebuttals and three assertions for gun control in her Thought Co. article, covering what she believes the best arguments for said gun control are. Her strongest pieces of evidence that support her central claim that “America Needs More Gun Control” (page 1) are “Australia, which has a similar frontier history to that of the United

Today in the United States gun control is a topic of immense debate, because of the shooting that took place at Sandy Hook Elementary located in Newtown, Connecticut. This most recent tragic event ended the lives of 20 students and six adults. Similar events have occurred across the United States at a movie theater in Colorado, on college campuses in Texas and Virginia, or at the grocery store in Arizona each destroying families in many communities. The questions deserving consideration is have the American people had enough lives destroyed by these horrible events and are Americans ready for the federal government to impose stricter gun control laws. Learning Team C is for stricter gun control laws and will

After eight years of Gov. Chris Christie's tumultuous tenure, a period marked by great promise and neglect, New Jersey is facing daunting fiscal challenges. The public employee pension system is troubled despite a landmark fix in 2001, the transit system is crumbling into Third World status, and the public school funding law has never been properly funded. These menacing problems could only be resolved through a just and able governor who would be able to fix and develop intellectual solutions to recover the state’s economy. When prompted to pick between the two candidates running in the gubernatorial 2017 election, it is apparent that Phil Murphy would be the most beneficial candidate in fixing much of the economic disaster left  unsolved

My current event is about the topic of the gun control controversy . If you do not know what gun control is I will explain. Gun control is basically the government progressively taking away our second amendment,which is the right to bare arms.If I’m not mistaken it’s in our bill of rights. They want to take our rights away. it is bad enough that we have the terrorist running around killing innocent people. Taking away our right to have guns will only make matters worse for us. How will we protect ourselves or our family if we have no arms at all? Also the government is scared to sell certain guns to the locals because of the capacity to kill but the criminals already have them. The background checks that they said that they will start doing

Different people have different opinions on the topic of bearing weapons. Some people believe that owning of weapons such as guns is good because it will help them against criminals while others feel that they should be banned. However, in June 2008, in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the United States Supreme Court ruled that people were allowed to keep guns for self-defense (Neily III, 2010). This was one of the most important rulings on gun rights since the adoption of Second Amendment in 1791 on Bill of Rights. The second Amendment of United States Constitution states that in a Free State, peoples’ right to bear and keep arms shall not be infringed. There have been many cases when the court has been engaged in interpreting the

The controversial issue of gun control is one of the most debatable topics among politicians and civilians alike. This is because of the complexity of gun control and the long history that is related to the subject. Gun control is typically an effort, by the government, to create legislation that regulates the sale and use of firearms within the country. There are various arguments that surround this topic which include gun-related violence, accidents, self-defense, murders, suicide, constitutional rights, and so on. James Q. Wilson, a professor who has taught at Pepperdine University, Harvard University, and the University of California, Los Angeles, and a published author of several books, take a negative stance on the subject of gun control. Wilson contributed to the gun control debate in the last few years with his written op-ed article. According to Wilson, there is no possible method to eradicate the hundreds and millions of guns that exist within the country, restrictive gun laws will not significantly affect the United States’ murder rate, and that guns play an important role in self-defense in everyday lives. Contrary to what Wilson believes, strict gun control is necessary and should be enforced to ensure public safety because gun laws have the power to produce a positive outcome in the long run, reduce gun-related violence, and reduce the numerous risks that gun ownership open.

The debate on gun control has been an issue in the United States since the country began. The founding fathers of the nation considered the issue so important it was addressed in the second amendment to the Constitution which 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" (US Const. amend. II). Of course these words have been interpreted differently through the years.

Johnson’s purpose of the article was simply to inform the reader, that gun law debates are not solely about liberal and conservatives arguing over their beliefs, but rather to shine light on the components that shape the individual’s belief about gun control. In this particular article, as a foundation, he uses the debate between the state of Oregon’s governor Kate Brown and sheriff John Hanlin, to bring into focus the different components that influence some of the debate over gun control. Gov. Brown believes in the state enforcing strict gun laws such as greater background checks for gun transfers in order to prevent a high crime rate. Sheriff Hanlin, on the other hand, stated, “This law is not going to protect citizens of Oregon in that

I found the article by Karimu (2015), “The Two Sides of Gun Legislation and Control Debate in United States of America,” to be detailed, well documented and, informative. The article exposes both positions of the debate regarding gun control advocate and people against. Is evident that the gun control debate is tight both positions present valid assumptions. I will definitely use this article as one of my

Gun ownership is an inalienable right provided to American citizens by the Constitution, and this controversial issue is still relevant today. The U.S has about 88.8 guns per 100 people, the highest amount out of any nation in the world. Guns laws should not restrict ownership; instead, efforts of reducing deaths require focusing on problems which lead to gun violence. I believe that no more gun control laws should be enacted in the U.S because they deny people a sense of security and infringe upon the right of self-defense. Owning a weapon is a critical component of the Constitution and deters crime based on the fear of the criminal.