Essay on Gun Control in Canada

The following critical analysis of the Essay, “The Second Amendment and the Right to Bear Arms” by Lee Professor of Law at William and Mary Law School, William Van Alstyne, is intended to highlight a few of the different short-comings and argumentative fallacies presented by even the most legally astute individuals who oppose forms of gun control. While the author does present a multi-facet and well-orchestrated presentation of fact and principle, there are two essential claims being asserted on his part. The author’s intent is to demonstrate the importance of gun right protection and to justify the NRA’s practices in the name of doing so. In my dissection of the essay, I intend to demonstrate the argumentative fallacies and examine the ways in which the NRA is generally harmful to the progression of gun control reform, and therefore public safety in the United

Gun violence is serious social problem and Canada has a long history of firearms control. However, increasing costs to the Canadian Firearms Program (CFP) has made it a lightning rod for criticism from both pro and anti-gun advocates. Reports out of the media and Auditor General Sheila Fraser paint a picture of inefficiency, incompetence and mismanagement.

Society’s concerns about protection from violent crimes involving firearms have encouraged Canadian Parliament to pass tougher gun control legislation. The Federal Government responded by passing Bill C-68 that created the Firearms Act,

There are gun control laws to try and reduce the number of violent shootings that occur. They are trying to put limits on weapons that Americans can own. The government is trying to take our guns away mainly because of people that are criminally insane. Most of the people who commit crimes don’t even have the weapons legally. If the government takes away the rights of people who are allowed to have firearms in their possession, it will most definitely cause an outrage. Most people believe that the people should be more capable of maintain proper use of the firearms instead of having them all taken away. Taking the firearms from Americans away would cause a lot more problems than there actually are. The people will be upset with the

Gun control in the United States has been a controversial issue for some time now. So much so that the Supreme Court even refuses to address this issue directly. Gun control really boils down to the the Second Amendment of the Constitution. Many people have different interpretations of the Second Amendment and the trenches are dug in deep on this issue. The Second Amendment can not provide the right to bear all types of arms to protect the people from governmental tyranny. If the Second Amendment was absolute, then we would allow the public to possess nuclear weapons, missiles, and other such arms, because like the 9 mm handgun that is an arm, a nuclear warhead is also a type of arm. The more our government restricts our rights to own

America needs to institute, and initiate gun control laws throughout the entire nation. But not everybody who inhabits the United States believes in regulating arms. Those who are against establishing gun laws argue that gun control directly infringes upon their “right to bear arms” granted to them by the 2nd Amendment. Anti gun control supporters, such as the National Rifle Association, often claim that the act of regulating guns is a sufficient reason why such an Amendment was introduced in the constitution; to protect themselves from any and all forms of violation of civil liberties and freedom. Supporters of anti gun laws are unwilling to welcome any interpretations of the 2nd Amendment that do not match up “word for word,” as was written in the Bill of Rights.

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.

The supreme court of Canada has overruled numerous laws put forward by the Harper government. In 2010, former Prime Minister Stephen Harper was opposed to the Vancouver Eastside supervised injection site. Stephen Harper took a conservative approach to the issue, he said that “we as a government will not use taxpayer’s money to fund drug use” (Rachlis, 2010). The Prime Minister did not recognize the potential benefits to Canadian society as he focused on budgeting, without recognizing the benefit to public welfare that would reduce disease, death and have a rehabilitative effect on participants of the program. Judicial decisions play an influential role in the provisions of the Constitution because their interpretation is essential to understanding and employing it. In this essay I will argue that the traditional role of the judges has evolved into having a determinative function of law, that allows judges to uphold citizen’s rights and preserve justice in Canada. Through analyzing judicial review, I will demonstrate how judge’s role is much more than an interpretation of law through exploring the idea of Charter proofing, integrating public opinion in decisions, production of common law and judicial activism that serve in creating a climate that is adaptive to new issues that may arise and free from arbitrary rule.

Gun Ownership and Gun Control in Canada The Oscar-won documentary ‘Bowling for Columbine’ has aroused people’s awareness of gun ownership and gun control issues. Should gun ownership be banned or should guns be controlled? Does gun ownership create a violent society? The answer is not measurable, however, from the firearm situation between America and Canada, the answer is more obvious.

For the purposes of this paper "Gun Control" is defined as policies enacted by the government that limit the legal rights of gun owners to own, carry, or use firearms, with the intent of reducing gun crimes such as murder, armed robbery, aggravated rape, and the like. So defined, gun control understandably brings favorable responses from some, and angry objections from others. The gun control

Over the last years gun control has become a very widely debated topic. The city, county and state lawmakers seem to be having different stands about the public having easy access to guns. Adam Small states, “After centuries of relative obscurity, the Second Amendment has become the center of an intense academic and legal battle during the last twenty years” (1213). The supporters of gun control and its opponents both claim to have the best interest of this country’s citizens .However, there are private citizens who believe that there should be laws to limit the number of people who own a gun. Even though the United States has enacted laws for regulating firearms, the recent shootings at Aurora movie theatre and Sandy

Through the years there has been an ongoing discussion on the Second Amendment and how it should be clarified. The issues that are being discussed is whether the government have has the right to manage guns. There are possibly two sides to this Second Amendment debate, where one is the collective side, which that the right was given only for collective ambitions. The collective side is in more favor since it has stricter gun control laws, that being said the government feels that having stricter laws on guns would lower the number of crimes that are committed with guns which would help save thousands of lives. Meanwhile gun control laws may subtract the criminals’ access to purchase or obtain firearms, in addition, the same law would limit

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.

Scholarly Essay: Gun Control There has been considerable debate recently in Canada over the issue of gun control. The Canadian parliament enacted the Firearms Act to enforce gun control by requiring gun owners to register their firearms. Just recently, the government of Alberta lead in a charge, including five other provinces and numerous pro-gun groups, complaining that the law is unconst...

Living a life in America, we all get to have all the rights that included in the Constitution. One of those was the Second Amendment which is the rights to bear arm, the purpose was to protect ourselves from danger but nowadays a lot of people have take advantage of it and use it in the wrong way. I believe our government need to have a strict limit on guns possession.