Gun Control And The Constitution Of The Nation

For years gun control advocates pushed for a law passed by the federal government. For years this has not worked as the government has not wanted to touch the matter and have potential backlash. Although the federal government has not done much and does not seem to be doing anything any time soon, the states have huge potential to start the change. State governments can decide what laws can be passed and how serious their guns laws will and should be.

Gun control has been a long debate to determine if it’s better to have stricter access to firearms. America is one of the few countries that has gun rights embedded in their constitution. But what makes the US exceptional is that it has the right to keep and bear arms, other countries do not provide the right to have access to them, but rather, the government is allowed to regulate its use. The right to bear arms has also been the cause of growing violence and crime, at least according to anti-gun lobbyists. Citizens should be aware the dangers and harm that guns present to society. Controlling the sale of firearms can greatly decrease the number of violent crimes.

On Wednesday June 18, 2015 nine shot dead at a historical black church in Charleston, South Dakota and only a month later on July 16, 2015 in Chattanooga, Tennessee with five dead leaving citizens devastated. The past year contains more than 350 mass shootings, averaging 1.02 shootings per day and continuous growing number of deaths, multiple mass shootings around the world leaving dozens of victims in its path. There is no exact definition of mass shootings, but most sources believe it is when four or more people are shot in one location. Citizens in America are easily able to obtain a gun and the growing issue is whether this should change and stronger laws in place. Although citizens believe gun control laws take away second amendment and right to protect themselves, mass shootings are increasing yearly and action needs to happen to prevent the next attack.

In about every nation, gun control has always been an issue of controversy. Gun control laws are quite different from country to country, each possessing different requirements, specifications, and ordinances, so on and so on. What will be examined are the specified gun control laws in three international countries, ranging from Canada, Australia, and Japan, as well as a comparison and contrast of the the similarities and unique differences toward American gun control laws and those in other countries, and finally, the effects of having loose gun control laws. Unlike America, these countries possess stricter laws regarding gun control.

In the Constitution, the second amendment gives the American people to have the right to possess and bear arms. This amendment has been the most controversial issue since guns have been around. Issues such as gun control and gun ownership have remained a matter of debate and have been floating around in Congress. It has been rumored that Congress is forced to draft certain legislation in order to come up with a law against unlawful use of arms, and only owning them for safety purposes. When it comes to congress, Republicans and Democrats have debated their views on gun-control in the United States to best fit the overall well-being of the citizens. These different points of views have caused many discussions on how this controversial topic should be handled and whether or not it conflicts with the second amendment. Throughout this topic, Republicans and hardcore NRA supporters favor with less strict rules of gun-control while Democrats want stricter rules such as a background check for every citizen that poses a threat to either the United States of America or the average citizen. The debate on guns in America has essentially become one more distracting, off-point topic in culture wars.

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.

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”. The way the Supreme Court interprets this amendment changes constantly because not even the Supreme Court fully understands the limits and rights given to citizens. Some argue that this amendment protects our right to own a gun, but is not very clear. Over the years the second amendment has become a huge debate over gun rights and gun control. This is a cause of all the gun violence this country has been facing for many years and they need a way to help prevent gun violence or even suppress the amount of deaths faced by these tragedies. One of the ways this

The United States of America is one of the very few countries in the world that allows their citizens to bear arms. The right to bear arms traces back all the way to the times of the 13 colonies. The Second Amendment has been up for many debates, especially in the recent light of mass shootings in the US. But does the entire removal and ban of firearms really work? Gun control and the second amendment has been a never ending conflict between politicians. As we look further into gun control there are more draw backs for the citizens than benefits.

Samuel Wurzelbacher, AKA Joe the Plumber, watched Richard Martinez mourn over the death of his only son who was shot in the Isla Vista rampage. He responded to Richard Martinez with an open letter on a website, Barbwire.com, saying : ‘I am sorry you lost your child. I myself have a son and daughter and the one thing I never want to go through, is what you are going through right now. But: as harsh as this sounds---your dead kids don 't trump my Constitutional rights.’ This is the type of thing that people find so terrible about the Second Amendment; because pro-gun zealots use the Second Amendment to protect their immoral actions, but this is their twisted and corrupted interpretation on the meaning and intent of the Amendment because this is in no way the original premise of the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms laid out in the Second Amendment is just because guns are weapons for self-defense. Precautions are taken on gun control, such as keeping a permanent record of all gun sales, requiring a license and certain mental certifications, and only allowing certain guns to be distributed to the public. Although some may argue that they can also be used to kill the innocent, the removal of guns from the possession of certified citizens will not stop crime, murder, or the death of innocents because guns are not the only weapons capable of these deaths.

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 our world today all sorts of crimes take place every second and there is nothing we can do about it. Not only that, but, with the dramatic rise in mass shootings in our nation comes a compelling division between political and legal agendas predicated on the Second Amendment. I want to emphasize that every single crime is violent whether is involves a handgun, knife or nothing at all. Everyone in our nation knows the law and it is the offender's choices to break it and harm others. With that being said, guns don't kill people, but the deaths of all these innocent people simply comes down to the morality of the men and women behind the weapon.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution 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” (Agresti, 2009, para. 2). Based on a simple reading of this, it would seem that people do have the right to own and use firearms. So why are so many people trying to ban guns? Maybe it is because they do not understand what the Second Amendment actually means. Maybe it is because the media only reports the crimes committed with guns and not the lives saved with them. What would happen to the crime rate in the United States if guns were banned altogether as other countries have done? While some people think guns should be banned, it has been

The ongoing debate about gun control i largely intertwines with the 2nd Amendment. In 1791, our founding fathers ratified the 2nd amendment to the constitution, allowing the “right to bear arms”. As law-abiding citizens, we should exercise our right to carry a gun responsibly. A large portion of the American population feels that any form of gun control enactment would infringe on their rights as a gun holder and eventually eliminate their privilege to possess a firearm. Which could possibly lead to challenging other civil liberties. However, due to the carnage left from mass killings, mentally disturbed attacks, assault weapons, and terrorist, stricter

Controversy on the right to have and bear arms brings into question the cost in human lives for the protections of the 2nd amendment of the US Constitution . At issue is whether personal gun ownership promotes a safer home and community environment, or whether guns and gun availability correlate with increasing violent crime. Violent crime in the United States has been steadily declining for over the past two decades. However, most serious violent crime in the United States is perpetrated with guns and statistics have indicated a sharp increase in 2015. By proposing a gun crime prevention strategy to reduce such serious violent crime, violent crime will dramatically decrease.

The citizens of the United States have enough pride to say that they have the right to carry their rifles and hand guns for self-defense. However, the Second Amendment is not unlimited to the use of all guns. Criminals and people who are mentally ill have found their ways of receiving a gun because of how flawed gun restrictions are in the United States. Because of the loose ends of gun restrictions, public shootings will continue to occur despite the alternative preventions available. The purpose of gun control is to manage the distribution of licensed weapons to people who qualify and have the right to carry a weapon with them for self-defense or sport.