and liberties are in jeopardy. There are threats that come from all around whether it be local or worldwide it should be our right to bear arms against terrors that we might encounter. The military defends us against worldly terrors, however if the military and other defense forces were the only ones who had the right to bear arms what kind of protection will that leave? There is not enough cops in the United States to protect every individual from the crime that happens in their city. For example, if guns are to restricted to the point of being banned safety would become a concern. Cops can only be in so many places at once, when people do not have the opportunity to protect themselves the criminals will see these as opportune targets. “In Connecticut (1643) and at least five other colonies, required "at least one adult man in every house to carry a gun to church or other public meetings" in order to protect against attacks by Native Americans; prevent theft of firearms from unattended homes” (Procons …show more content…
When the cops do arrive and the burglars are still in the home the individual are left defenseless without any weapon when a criminal has weapons and only the law enforcement creating hostage situations. Creating restrictions should be the goal however not to the point where guns cannot be used for self-defense. According to ProCon.org “Several colonies' gun laws required that heads of households (including women) own guns and that all able-bodied men enroll in the militia and carry personal firearms”. This was to ensure that the men and women could defend their homes and their country when a foreign invasion happens. They were meant to be their own militia against the invasion of their homes and neighborhood. During the Revolutionary era they were allowed to own guns to defend what was theirs, during this era the same right should be bestowed upon this
With the topic of gun control comes a widely split crowd. There are those that believe that gun control is necessary for decreasing crime and making a nation a safer place to live. And on the other end of the spectrum, they are those that speak of how anti-gun control is what would make our nation a safer place to live. After all, ?Would a person be as likely to break into another family's home knowing that the family has means of personal protection?? (Warren 308). ?Most everyone will agree that felons, addicts, morons, juveniles, alcoholics, the mentally incompetent, and others in whose hands even an ice pick or a baseball bat becomes a deadly weapon, should be denied a gun.? (Selib 202) However, what about those individuals that are
Imagine waking up in the middle of the night to a complete stranger who is in your house, threatening to harm you, and your family, and you cannot do anything about it. Imagine, not being able to go target shooting or hunting, because there are laws passed to prevent you from owning a firearm. The truth is, more and more people in this country are trying to restrict law-abiding people from owning firearms due to the overwhelming rise in gun related crimes. As law abiding citizens, the constitution gives us the right to bear arms. Whether it is for recreation or protection,
Gun control is a very controversial issue among society at present. Many feel guns are the cause of a great amount of crime. This has been an especially popular topic recently in lieu of the shooting at Columbine and other high schools across the country. Are these crimes reason to take away our freedom to bear arms? I do not believe so. The average person uses guns mainly as a means of protection. If limitations are placed on guns, they will only stop the average American from obtaining a gun. The real criminals out there will still be able to obtain guns through the black market. Every American should have the right to protect them self.
Only this month, 59 were killed and over 500 people were injured during a country music concert in Vegas in what is now known as the deadliest mass shooting in American history. Last year, 49 were killed and 58 were injured in a gay nightclub in Florida. In 2012, a mass shooting in Sandy Hook Elementary School took 27 lives, 20 of them being first graders. The list of these unthinkable and stomach-churning acts is quickly turning endless, forcing us to rethink why we truly have the right to bear arms. Many defend the second amendment by claiming we need this right for self defense, which is the most wretched part.When we look at what we have lost compared to what we have earned in this fight to keep the right to bear arms, this privilege does not seem worth the sacrifice of so many lives. In today’s world, we do not defense through guns but from them. Our policymakers keep trying to reach a compromise by putting in place certain regulations. “Some states require would-be gun owners to fulfill a firearms safety course in order to obtain their license.” “Such training courses, however, even when not required, are very advisable for the would-be gun owner, as they ensure that he or she has all the necessary information on liability issues, on safety, and even on care and maintenance of the gun” ( How to Get a Gun License 1). This lack of attention illustrates that despite the multiple tragedies that have taken place in our nation, some states do not even require a simple safety course that ensures the safety of our people. Furthermore, it is required that one must pass a background check. The questions asked on the test are the following:
Across the United States of America a debate rages on daily, that debate is whether or not to allow the public to obtain and operate firearms. The right to bear arms has been fused together with American culture for hundreds of years. Many advocates for gun control are against citizens of the United States being able to possess and operate firearms, even though it is a necessary evil and is a right of every man and woman across the country. Gun control in the United States is a dangerous topic but one that needs to be addressed. American citizens have the right to bear arms, and the evidence is there to prove that it can be done effectively and safely.
Throughout the years there has been an ongoing debate over the Second Amendment and how it should be interpreted. The issue that is being debated is whether our government has the right to regulate guns. The answer of who has which rights lies within how one interprets the Second Amendment. With this being the case, one must also think about what circumstances the Framers were under when this Amendment was written. There are two major sides to this debate, one being the collective side, which feels that the right was given for collective purposes only. This side is in favor of having stricter gun control laws, as they feel that by having stricter laws the number of crimes that are being
There are a lot of people that don’t feel safe out there in the world when they are by themselves.The people need to have the right to Bear Arm in order protect themselves from all of the crazy violence that happens everyday out in the world. People need to have the right to bear arms for self defense in order to protect themselves from home invaders, and robberies, and rapist. The people of the Unites States have the right to feel safe in the world and they should not have to be scared if a shooting is going to happen or not. There has been a lot of random shooting throughout America, for instance a shooting just happen up in Organ at a community college, after the shooter killed and injured some of the college students in Organ he committed suicide.There is a lot more shootings that has happen in this past year, there has been 18 mass shootings in 2015 alone, According to the washingtonpost.com. So the people should have the Right to Bear Arms in the United States of America.
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.
The Purpose of the Constitution is to Set A National Government with Separation Of Power, and Checks and Balances. The Bill Of Rights purpose is to protect American Citizens Rights. There are 27 Amendments in the Constitution, but 10 of those 27 are considered the Bill Of Rights.
Since I was a little girl, I remember hunting season; Dad and Katlyn, my sister, would come home to say they killed a deer. Even though I did not enjoy hunting, I still see how much they love to go; hunting great bonding time for them. My dad taught my sister and me how important gun safety is. He has shown us how to carry a gun properly, never to aim it at anyone, never put our finger on the trigger until ready to shoot, and always leave the safety button on until ready to shoot as well. In my house guns are always hidden or locked up in a safe, only Dad knows the combination, so no intruder can get to them. Guns are a very serious item. I was raised to understand guns are not something to joke around about; if they are in the hands
One of many controversial topics in the United States is gun control. It is clearly written in the Second Amendment of the Constitution that the people will have the right to bear arms. Recently; however, people have been misusing those firearms and have been harming others with them. The government is trying to regulate the sale, distribution, and ownership of guns because of this reason. Some of the arguments being made by the politicians is simply if the government has the right to be able to control, and if it does, the effectiveness of the public policy to regulate guns.
“What, sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. Whenever governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.” – Noah Webster, Father of American Scholarship and Education, English-language spelling reformer (think dictionary), political writer, editor, and prolific author. Owning a gun is a very powerful right to have. Could the government or those in power be scared of someone having more power than they do? The first step to controlling a population is to take away their right to weapons. You say well they just want to ban automatic, not hunting or handguns; it ’s a slippery slope friend. It’s a short step from one type of gun to another, then they say, you don’t need hunting guns you can buy meat at the grocery, and so on. The right to bear arms is what allows us to protect all of our other rights. Ultimately, gun ownership is a right that we have today, passed on to us by the forefathers of this nation because they had to fight, bleed and die for that right. In fact, many states only agreed to approve the Constitution with the condition of the amendments, we know as the Bill of Rights today, would be added. The fight is still the same but with a new enemy and, in the end, their goals are the same: control over its people. Think
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
Gun Control is a heavily debated topic especially after Donald Trump was elected president. It is often looked at in a very black and white way but that is far from how it should be looked at, it's not just banned or be completely free, there are many different policies that can get put in place to limit firearm usage. Often times when debating about gun control people point out statistics on murder rates and yes, the murder rate in America is really high but if you compare that to a number of people that die from car crashes, drowning, medical mistakes, animal attacks, work accidents it doesn't seem anywhere near as drastic. I believe that guns are not the problem America faces, it's the fatality rate of some of these ways to die that is ridiculous.
If you have ever been in a life threatening situation with no way to defend yourself, being denied access to a firearm makes the situation worse. Many law abiding citizens that feel threatened are not able to obtain a firearm for protection. Innocent people are dying while criminals are getting away with gun related crimes. There can be many regulations and laws against guns, but if a person wants a gun they will find a way to get one. The thought of criminals having guns in their possession is a scary thought, but would you want to be the one who is unarmed? Research shows there is no direct correlation between gun control and lower crime rates; therefore, denying law abiding citizens access to weapons for protection is unfair