Argumentative Essay On The Second Amendment

More than than 270,000 troops are being denied their gun rights,mainly from the thoughts of those who are against the 2nd Amement. It really is common in the United States. And they also are very powerful and one shot can change your life for the worst, if used incorrectly. And that shot can or even could killed somebody. And that what makes them deadly. Guns are essiential to the United States of America because guns give us protection, and they are used for hunting and other recreational activities, and they really aren’t the biggest problem to the country.

The first amendment grants religious freedom to all citizens of the United States but when does that religions power and actions go too far, and when are we supposed to draw the line? The First Amendment grants religious freedom to the Citizens of the United States allowing them to believe what they want and freely practice their religion. This goes as far to say what happens when their power goes too far. Whether it be deemed illegal or something that the states don't feel should be going on. Should we turn our cheeks and let it go on. I feel that there should be a point in which we do put limitations on people's actions in their religions. The Founding Fathers knew that freedom of religion was very important and one of the reasons they came to America. Therefore, we have the free exercise clause and the establishment clause. These all give citizens the right to hold their beliefs and practice their religions freely but, when those actions start to go against the law and harm other people then there is a point where we need to put limitations on them.

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

American Law Biding Citizens must not allow a Ban On Guns [http://oneamericansopinion-xerox561.blogspot.com/] and let me explain why. I am afraid for the direction in which this country is headed on various levels, but one area of concern that has been under siege for a long time is the 2ND Amendment. Now that we have a Democratically controlled congress and a very Liberal President, that concern has grown even more. Especially, with the tragic but senseless random shootings that have taken place over the past few weeks.

The Second Amendment to the U.S Constitution is fiercely debated and interpreted differently among American citizens and argued with between the Legislative and Judicial branches of our government. “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,” (Brooks). Because of the Second Amendment, citizens have the right to possess firearms and use them for protection. When researching the origin of the Second Amendment, its modern applications, and its relevance in today’s society, one can determine the Second Amendment’s current implications on today’s society.

The Bill of Rights is considered a cornerstone for freedom in America. It purpose to the country is to protect the rights of the citizens in the United States. The Bill of Rights was put in place in order to ensure that the people will be granted a number of personal rights as an American citizen, and that the government will not become as powerful as to pose a threat to the citizens of the United States.

In 1787, when the Constitution was initially drafted, the First Amendment was not included, moreover there were no Bill Rights. However, we saw where this could leave an open door for a stronger central government to deny the rights of the people. The First Amendment did not allow to make laws that would infringe upon the right to religious freedom, speech, freedom of the press, and the right to assemble. Furthermore, the First Amendment as it pertains to religious freedom, which says Congress could not pass any legislation concerning the forming of a religion, or persecution for practicing your religious rituals. Most American would say that freedom of speech is the foundation in which a democratic society provides the minority a voice, in

The right to bear arms is a birth given right to all Americans by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Second Amendment has become controversial recently due to the technological advancement of firearms. Modern firearms are capable of both high rates of fire and greater capacities of ammunition, unlike the single shot muskets that were available at the time of the Second Amendment’s conception. American liberals view these improvements in firearms as dangerous and unnecessary. However, no matter how dangerous firearms may be, the Second Amendment is a necessity for one factor alone: protection from one’s own government and it must be upheld. The Second Amendment provides a physical tool for Americans to defend themselves against a tyrannical government, it allows Americans to form militias against a tyrannical government, and it allows Americans to maintain comparable firearms of the U.S. government in order to prevent the potential loss of American freedoms in the future.

“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.” In our political climate today, there is an ongoing debate on the meaning of the second amendment. In particular, much controversy centers upon whether we should make gun control laws more strict like the laws in DC, or if we should make laws to encourage and embrace American citizens to own firearms and carry them in public, similar to laws in Vermont. In fact, some citizens wonder why we even have the second amendment in the first place.

Most people would link violence and crime problems with gun control in America. The debate that Americans face today is the freedom the Second Amendment gives citizens and whether or not the country should repeal it. While some people feel that repealing it should solve the problem, others believe that it is one of the most important basic freedoms we have as Americans. Federal gun control laws are unconstitutional, and I believe the Second Amendment is both an individual and state right.

The second amendment, not only a right in the United States but today it 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. Throughout history, this sentence of twenty seven words has caused an intense debate. The polemic is that some people claim that a gun control policy is unconstitutional, while others disagree and even say it is necessary in order to reduce crime. Now, what does gun control mean? If it means to analyze who is responsible enough to own a gun by a “Universal Background Check”; that sounds right to everyone. But in the article “What Are Obama’s Gun Control Proposals? An Easy Guide” published in the National Journal by Matt Vasilogambros. The author states that the “gun-control

"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.

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

One of the most controversial topics in America today is the second amendment. While some may argue that the public release of gun owners addresses is acceptable because of their opposition to the second amendment, many believe addresses being published is completely unnecessary. I believe the newspaper that published addresses of gun owners acted incredibly irresponsibly because the just society of the United States owes each individual their privacy and security.