Freedom Of Speech, And Possession Of Guns

Kids always try to get their hands on a Nerf or airsoft gun. But imagine if people HAD to bear arms in the US. People get shot all of the time, and that is one of the major reasons why this law should be passed. Also, guns are popular, with people going paintballing and kids playing with Nerf guns. But the only problem would be that if weapons are distributed into the wrong hands, heck could break loose. This law should be passed because is for the better.

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.

Wayne LaPierre, a gun rights advocate and executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, said, “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” Gun control is laws that regulate the sale and possession of firearms. These laws have become a more prominent discussion due to crime, and they attempt to reduce violence. Many countries have some sort of gun control, but the United States have different rules for each state. The United Kingdom have some of the strictest firearm laws. Guns in America are a constitutional right, increase personal safety, and decrease crime.

The Right to Bear Arms was the second amendment put into place when creating the nation. It gives the people of our country the right to keep and own a gun. Today, just over two hundred years later, one of the biggest debates in society is on gun control and how the people should be handling their weapons. The gun control in the country is something that should be taken more seriously as lives and well beings are at stake.

It is in our own lives we define what we believe and what we believe in ultimately defines us. Not only do our views of ourselves matter as to who we are, what we stand for, and what we deem important, but also others’ view of our own person are sometimes just as or more important. In reference to the Second Amendment and gun control, the author, Saul Cornell, makes a case for how sometimes every group can think they are the ones in the right, but at the same time, every group can ultimately be in the wrong. It is important to think of not just right or wrong and the rights given to citizens by the Second Amendment to the Constitution, but to think back deeper into history as well and what helped to found the United States of America.

In the United States the right to own a gun is enshrined by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The text of the Second Amendment reads: “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” (Adams, 2004). The founding fathers borrowed this idea from Niccolo Machiavelli, the Italian thinker. He wrote about the weapons necessary for freedom to defend themselves, to hunt, and to protect the state against foreign invasion. For two hundred years, this tradition has become an integral part of American culture that spawned many cultural phenomena that have become the hallmark of the United States. For example, duels in the desert areas of the

For quite some time now, there has been big controversy about whether we should have the right to bear arms and how we should be able to obtain weapons / how we should be with them (gun control). The 2nd Amendment ties into gun control and stirs up a lot of debate. Some people believe it’s a danger to society, and some people believe that taking away guns would be taking away our freedom in a way. If we had stricter gun laws, people say there would be less tragedies and mass-shootings. But on the other hand, it’s said that we need guns to defend ourselves maybe in times like this. Although it’s in the Constitution some people just don’t agree and say that the 2nd amendment can be interpreted different ways. There is serious disagreement about whether guns protect liberty or threaten it (Waters, Timothy William, 2017).

The second amendment entitles the people to own or bear arms. Many people today believe that gun rights should be repealed or removed for the Bill of Rights, but I believe that this is one of our very first amendments and it is one of the most important ones, because it keeps the government from imposing tyranny or an oppressive government upon the people. The second amendment also give us the ability to protect ourselves without the government taking the right away from you. History is filled with stories of government overpowering people, and without the second amendment these problems will repeat themselves. The past couple of months this year believe that gun laws or rights are being violated, and many people are voting to repeal the second amendment because of these people hurting others with the right to own a gun.

Mass shootings are increasing in the United States, and gun control advocates are seizing the opportunity to push anti-gun legislation to deter gun violence in America. Guns and the Second Amendment have come to the forefront of political rhetoric, leading to conflicting views between lawmakers on the future of gun legislation. Republican lawmakers are encouraging law abiding citizens to acquire firearms and to defend themselves against acts of violence by criminals. On the contrary, Democratic lawmakers believe the only way to slow gun violence in the United States is to remove guns from society. While certain politicians believe strict gun laws would protect the American people, the proposed policies would make our nation more vulnerable

When I was introduced to the topic of France’s ban on the veil, I disagreed with the law. I took a position based on my customs as an American citizen, which differs completely from those of France. International critics began to argue that France is violating what people call “Freedom of Religion,” which I agreed with at first. As a foreigner from America, I am accustomed to the American government’s definition of freedom of religion. Protected by the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise.” (Religious Freedom). You can express your religion in public, during church, mass, or religious meetings. So the presence of religious items such as the burqa's and veil do not disturb the people or government.

The world is a dangerous place to live. Every day, we wake up, send our children off to school and spend most of our lives working. We put ourselves in harm’s way every time we leave our homes. At any moment, we could be killed in an automobile accident, plane crash, gunshot wound or any other random occurrence that happens in this crazy world we live in. There have been so many advancements in technology and medicine to protect ourselves from these lucks of the draw events that life throws at us, but some people seem to have a problem with gun ownership. Gun ownership for many is viewed like the seatbelt of a car or the vaccine given to us to prevent the Flu, it is a form of protection and security. Some people in our country would argue that there needs to be a banning of fire arms or more restrictions to keep fire arms out of people’s hands. I disagree with this idea. I feel that Federal and State governments should not bad firearms or make the purchasing process more difficult. It is every legal citizen right to bear arms, whether it is for protection or sport.

Banning the burqa has become increasingly deliberate since 2011 in France. The burqa ban is also known as a ban that is against women wearing all face coverings while out in public places in France. On April 11, 2011 the ban of the burqa went into effect. There has, however, been much debate on this matter. Women think that the ban is discrimination to them, but on the other end, France believes that it will be a good thing for the country and the violence in the country. This ban was taken into court by an Islamic woman, who would only go by the name of S.A.S. This ban actually prevents the women from being abused and will help with the safety around the community. This ban was not meant to be discriminating or take any religious freedoms. Based off of evidence, France, the Defendant of the case has the right to ban the burqa from wear because of safety reasons.

Were to fix freedom of speech and gun rights weed have to reconstruct the laws. First off with freedom of speech the press need some restraints put on them because what they doing is not ok. They need to state clearly if they are being biased, there contends is misleading or if they don’t have all the facts and if they decided not to they can get in trouble from a small fine to being suspended with fine. Second gun rights all the previous safety las stay like having to have a safe but take off all the taxis and bans on

When I was first introduced to the topic of France’s ban on the veil, I disagreed with the law. I took a position based on my customs as an American citizen which differs completely to those of France. International critics began to argue that France is violating what people call “Freedom of Religion”, which I agreed with at first. As a foreigner from America, I am accustomed to the American governments definition of freedom of religion. Protected by the First Amendment “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof: or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” (Religious Freedom). You can express your religion in public, during church, mass, or religious meetings. So the presence of religious items such as the

Currently, the French want to ban the wearing of religious symbols in public schools so that there is no social tension, and to keep the main religion in France (Roman Catholicism) ‘pure’ (Gofen 63). But even though the French say they want to keep their culture pure, in reality since the world wars, religions such as Islam and Judaism have in fact become a part of their culture. Once again, the French let in other cultures knowingly, and once the cultural diversity begins, all the religions are apart of a country’s culture. An example of a religious symbol that the French are considering to ban is the Burka. A Burka is an outfit worn by Muslim females that cover them head to toe. Some, who want to ban the burka say that it is disrespectful to women and can be degrading. But, 64 million people in France are Muslim. By wearing a Burka they are just following their religion and are also following tradition (French). One other big controversy regarding religious symbols is the banning of