Gun Control Is Unconstitutional

United States is a country that has problems with gun control, and this issue has many debates between whether or not people should be allowed to carry a gun on them. This free county not only for speech and religion, but also allows people to have the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment of the United States was written by our Founding Fathers,“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” (Government). The main purpose of the Second Amendment when our Founding Fathers wrote this amendment was to help the American citizens to defend themselves from the government at that time, and other countries from invading their properties. However,

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.

Although both Blek and Sobran address very different viewpoints when it comes to if gun control is Constitutional or Unconstitutional, Blek tends to focus on why there should be restrictions and gun laws in place while Sobran emphasis that the right to bear arms should not be invaded or limited. Both men highlight some specific topics that are actually similar in nature yet, each with their own twist, allowing a person to fully grasp both sides and depict both the positive and negative affect if gun laws where in fact implemented.

Imagine the world with only law enforcement offices and the United States Military with firearms. How would we be able to protect ourselves and our property? Gun Control is a violation of our Second Amendment because it limits who can own a firearm and it restricts our right to protect ourselves and our property.

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

It is not very likely of being attacked when someone armed. Criminal's fear armed citizens. Victims who used guns for protection were less likely either to be attacked or injured than victims who responded in any other way (Long 112). According to the U.S. Justice Department victimization studies, a citizen that uses arms stands not only a greater chance of avoiding injury than his or her unarmed counter part, but also increases his or her odds of failing the criminal assault (Long 104). The police force went on strike in Albuquerque, New Mexico. During this time the crime rate decreased because frightened citizens armed themselves and protected their homes and businesses (Media Watch). Criminals did not want to face indignant citizens protecting their own property with the same force the criminals used to steal it.

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

On the opposing side, some others may say that the equation of more guns equals less crime is absolutely absurd. Sabina Thaler the author against guns states “crime victims uniformly use guns in self-defense is false. Women, for example, are less likely to use guns to protect themselves and are in fact in greater danger when doing so.” This statistic will help show that even if you have a gun to protect yourself, you might put

A comforting fact about guns is that they enable the common citizen to protect themselves. In some parts of the country, it can take 20 minutes or longer for first responders to arrive. Because of this, a large part of our personal safety depends on our ability to defend ourselves (Gun Control Overview 5). This in itself proves the necessity of firearms for the well-being of the common citizen. There are also numerous colleges that implement what students should do in the event of a shooting in their handbook. “West Virginia University advises students that if the situation is dire, they should “act with physical aggression and throw items at the active shooter.” These items could include ‘student desks, keys, shoes, belts, books, cell phones, iPods, book bags, laptops, pens, pencils, etc.’” (Goldberg 12). The very existence of these policies is evidence that local law enforcement

The second amendment of the 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.” (Cornell Law) For over fifty years, the amendment has been interpreted to the courts that people individually do not have the right to own gun, but rather that this right is to be regulated by legislatives on the federal,

"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 words of the second amendment in the United States Constitution. The amendments guarantee america citizens the right to bear arms. This right grants men have the right to bear arms their for protection or for the militia they were served in. This amendment today should grant all civilians to own guns.

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. This line taken from the 2nd Amendment states to all who live under the governing power of the Bill of Rights as well as the Constitution of the United States of America, that their right to own and to operate a weapon can’t be taken away. It is a privilege to be able to bear arms, as some countries do not have the right to do so. We must understand that the 2nd Amendment is as important as any other amendment and we must protect our right to bear arms.

attacked or injured than victims who respond in any other way. Since guns empower the

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution 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.” The constitution is clearly saying all citizens have the right to be able to own and carry a weapon or firearm. On June 26, 2008, in District of Columbia v. Heller, the United States Supreme Court held in a 5-4 decision that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home and within federal enclaves (Cornell 1). This is showing how our founding fathers supported the right to bear arms.

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