Descriptive Essay - Original Writing

“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.” These are the famous words drafted by the founding fathers into the Bill of Rights. This particular amendment has since then been a major part of American culture. Through the second amendment it has given American citizens freedom to buy firearms of any sort: AR-15s, AK-47s, handguns, and the like for self-defense. However, in light of the most recent mass shootings, people have felt that it is time to change if not regulate the freedom the second amendment grants. That is to say that some believe that there needs to be a solution to reduce if not end the gun violence in America by regulating and restricting the access to weapons meant for the police and military by American civilians. Ultimately, the solution to this social problem of gun violence in America is gun control. What is gun control exactly? From an extreme conservative's perspective, gun control is a means of disarming the public and infringing the right the second amendment grants Americans. What this point of view fails to take into account is that gun control is not about infringing on any right or disarming American civilians. It is about restricting the access and sales of deadly firearms to potential felons who have the capability of using them to commit mass murder. Furthermore, what some do not realize is that the second amendment was written in

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 banning of guns at the hands of the American government would leave law-abiding citizens defenseless against armed thieves. In America, many criminals use guns to commit an inconsiderable amount of crimes, such as murder and robbery. To prepare for a worst-case scenario, people who have a gun license arm themselves with multiple firearms to protect their families. By arming themselves, gun owners feel some sense of security, should they be involved in a gun-related incident. In the article “The NRA Is Right, But We Still Need to Ban Handguns,” the author states that “One tenet of the National Rifle Association’s faith has always been that handgun controls do little to stop criminals from obtaining handguns” (Sugarmann). If the

There have been many times where people in stores, at house and even in the streets have done self protection with the usage of guns. 9 out of 10 times a criminal is going to flee the place if he or she notices that person with a gun. A victim of rape, Kimberly Corban, ask Obama in a press conference of how she is suppose to protect herself and her children if another accident happens. Another example of how owning firearms are a key part of self protection is how they can can scare people off that put you in danger. A man from Texas, James Gerow, woke up hearing an intruder in his house. He quickly walked out of his room noticing a man wearing a dark hoodie how shouldnt have been in his house. James grabbed his gun and chased the man outside where the cops have arrived and took the criminal to the nearest prison available. Therefore, many people use guns to protect themselves. James used the gun for self protection and he did not shoot at the intruder. This means if the usage of guns is taken away from the people that live in the United States how are they suppose to protect

Furthermore, according to Gunowners.org, Gary Kleck’s book, who is a professor in the school of criminology and criminal justice at Florida State University in Tallahassee, implies that guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self defense, which means that each year firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.” Gunowners.org also adds, as reported by the National Safety Council, “Of the 2.5 million times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, the overwhelming majority merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8% of the time, a citizen will kill or wound his/her attacker.” This proves how citizens are more likely to use guns in case of self defense, and if the gun is needed it is most often used just to scare the criminal away. When debating if concealed-carry should be allowed, it should be considered that law-abiding citizens know how to use guns with common sense. In the final analysis, even if it is proclaimed that if one allows guns in certain places it will end up with guns in the hands of criminals, it is quite easy to see people have been given the right to possess guns, therefore one may use it in case of an

Gun control laws should regulate production, distribution, ownership and use of firearms by civilians. Gun control laws are not intended to dispossess law abiding citizens of licensed firearms but to intervene on reckless use of firearms that cause harm to the public. Gun control should also make it difficult for criminals to access firearms. Armed civilians have in many instances deterred acts of crime from being instigated by scaring away criminals. Nonetheless, gun laws can only be described as immensely lax. This essay seeks to argue for the enactment of strict gun control laws by highlighting the dangers posed by guns in the hands of members of the public.

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 right to bear arms is believed to have been intended to allow citizens to arm themselves and overthrow the government if it ever were to break the constitution or become a tyranny. While that still holds true today, guns have become a far more integral part of life and the protection of ones property. Those in opposition to gun control argue that guns are necessary to defend their homes and their lives. These people “acknowledge, support, and defend the law-abiding citizen's God-given right of self-defense” (Republican Party on Gun Control). A level playing field, and armed civilians offers the opportunity to protect property and stop these mass shootings before they get out of hand. Take the Dark Knight shooting in Aurora Colorado. Perhaps somebody in that theater has a CCW (Concealed Weapon Carry Permit), and when the shooting began, he fired back and wounded the attacker, possibly saving multiple lives. Another belief of gun control opposition is that disarming civilians gives an advantage to criminals. Criminals by definition break the law, if a man plans on committing mass murder, he will simply go outside legal means to find a weapon. Therefore civilians are now disarmed against illegally armed attackers. Perhaps more guns would make criminals rethink robbing that store or attacking someone. For example, Switzerland has the most guns

American citizens have been given a right to firearms, and this right should not be infringed. Opponents of this right to firearms argue that, citizens should not be allowed the right to firearms. Their main reason is that, it will help curb violence cases by guns. This has been challenged because; criminals will still acquire firearms illegally and continue terrorizing citizens because, they are fully aware that, they are not armed. Moreover, according to Winkler (89), “Guns do not kill people; it is people who kill people,” and so, denying citizens the right to own guns will not stop any violence. Likewise, the society will not be safe as there will be an increase in violence and criminal activities because the citizens have no firearms to defend themselves.

Imagine somebody breaking into your home with the intentions of hurting you and your family and trying to take all your valuables that you own in your house, and not having anything to protect your loved ones. Without the protection of a firearm, the intruder could injure or kill all members within the household easily. In the United States, according to the Bill of Rights, a citizen has the right to bear arms, however, recently people have started to believe that guns only incite violence and therefore gun laws need to be more strict. Although, If you own the firearm for the right reasons and go through the process of having a carrying license, then that is within your rights to protect yourself and be able to own the gun. Therefore,

Imagine waking up in the middle of the night, and hearing sounds coming from downstairs. You know you should be alone, but there is someone else inside your house. What do you do? Would you call the police? The truth is, they would not be able to help you. You are all alone, and you have to be able to defend yourself. People need guns to defend themselves and those around them.

Trevor Burrus from Cato Institute's Center for Constitutional Studies showed how the use of guns for good are far greater than uses for the bad. “In the past 20 years, the cases of permit holders using their guns improperly are quite rare.”(Burrus 3). This is a problem for gun control because the valid arguable point for it is becoming increasingly smaller. This is also a problem for the media because they report vague negative gun usage rather than positive because a large majority of the media's reporters are liberal gun control advocates. Americans who concealed carry firearms are better off in a defense position rather than an unarmed civilian. “studies have found that Americans use guns defensively between 830,000 and 2.45 million times per year.” (Burrus 2). This is a problem because a very small percentage of gun related incidents make it to the news, therefore people think that there aren't as many firearm crimes than there is, and could potentially be unarmed in an emergency situation. Also this means that since there are this many people using guns defensively, there are people who die innocently because they are unarmed. From this, the government had make the laws that prevent people from being able to defend themselves in desperate defense

The idea with guns being a part of every citizens life is that it is for protection. It is disputed, that if a citizen has a gun to protect themselves, then they can prevent unnecessary deaths. For example, the shooting that took place in Aurora, Colorado back in 2012, involved 12 fatalities and 70 more injuries. Some argue, that this shooting could have been avoided if one or more of the people in that movie theatre were armed. Granted, there could have still been people that were killed, but the numbers could have been cut drastically. Another example that seems to be used in this topic is that of home invasion. Many insist, that if they have a gun to defend themselves then they will be safer. These same people have the idea that if someone were to break in with deadly force, then they would be dead before the police could even respond. Therefore, by having a weapon, people can protect their family and their

Uncle Hyunwoo tutted in annoyance when the lead of his pencil snapped while finishing a Sudoku he had started in the morning. He glanced at the clock: 7:38 pm. Hyunjung had told him she was staying another two hours after school, so he expected her to have been back by 6:45 at the latest and it had now been almost more than an hour since then.

I rolled out of bed and landed on the ruff discoloured carpet; I hadn 't vacuumed in months. I got up. I stretched out my ridged body. I fumbled to the door, not being bothered to switch on the lights. My tongue was dry and I needed something to quench my thirst- soda. Once I entered the hallway, I was assailed by a blinding light coming from Savannah 's, my sister 's bedroom. Curious - I made my way towards her room as my eyes adjusted to the new-found brightness.