2nd Amendment
Is the owner of a firearm more dangerous than the neighbor that doesn’t? Firearms and how they are being used has been a very controversial topic. Firearms could be used for protection or could be used as a weapon to hurt someone. Both are very good reasons why people are so torn. Firearms have a positive effect on both the past and in society today.
"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 of the United States)
Having strict regulations might protect our society, or it could make it more dangerous. There are those that will not give up their right to own and bare arms because they
…show more content…
It depends on the intentions of the owner and how much respect and knowledge they have for the firearm. Some don’t know how much respect a firearm should have. They have to know that a firearm can harm others. That is a lesson that is best taught to kids around twelve years of age and older. They also need to know how to handle a firearm. Treat a gun like it is always loaded, and that will help give them the knowledge they need to handle a firearm with care. “Unrealistic perceptions of children’s capabilities and behavioral tendencies with regards to guns were common among gun owners. Half of all gun owning parents believed that active strategies (eg, education, supervision) were the best methods of preventing gun injuries to children older than twelve years of age.” (Daniel W. Webster)
One way that the idea of a firearm being used as a protective source, is that teachers could have guns. If the teacher has a Concealed Carry Permit, they can legally carry a handgun. To have a Concealed Carry Permit, you have to be 21 to take, and pass, a class. That also includes a background check. There are two different types of Concealed Carry Permits. There is one that cannot be used in some other surrounding states. These include Washington, Oregon, and California. There is also an
“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” merely proclaims a purpose. It does not limit nor expand the scope of the sentence “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The clause’s text demonstrates that it brings an individual right to keep and bear arms (Bill of
There are three main advantages for allowing teachers to carry a concealed weapon. The three advantages are casualties will be reduced if you could take down the shooter quickly before the shooter kills any more people,
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
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.
The Second 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”.1 It is important to understand that the Second Amendment was created in order to allow the American people to form militias in response to a tyrannical government attempting to suppress the American way of life. In order for Americans to form militias, they must uphold their freedom to bear arms as a
‘“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.”’ (“Gun Control”) Due to firearms, more than 30,000 people die in America every year. Mass shootings happen frequently and people die because of the lack of laws and their security. The United States needs better gun control laws because automatic assault rifles are easy to buy, the mentally ill can purchase guns, and many die from guns each year.
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
“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.
“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 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). Ever since 1791, Americans have had the right to bare arms. Recently people have begun debating whether or not these rights should still apply and lawmakers have even been slowly taking them away. Our founding fathers were clear when they stated that these rights shall not be infringed.
The Second Amendment says “ 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 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 well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear
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 suicides and murders have been committed by gun usage, Libresco Leah thinks banning assault rifles are pointless; therefore, guns don't kill people, people do.