The United States’ Constitution was designed to be able to be adaptable as the country continues to exist. Because of its versatile vagueness, debates have always arisen about the rights, laws, and procedures listed in the document. One of the most debated parts of the Constitution is the Bill of Rights especially the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment lists the right for the people to establish a well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms. While interpretations of the freedom vary, the relationship that American’s have with guns is becoming unhealthy. This crisis is evident through the fact that people suffering mental illnesses can buy guns, people are allowed to carry firearms on school grounds, and weapons can be sold without having to be registered to the new owner.
On February 15, 2017, the United States Senate voted to lift the Obama-era regulation that would have forced Social Security to scour its lists and report some of its beneficiaries to the firearms no-buy list. This ban was one of the pieces of legislation that Obama had based his reelection campaign around. The idea behind this plan was to prevent those who receive social security due to
…show more content…
This policy is known as "campus carry," which permits licensed gun holders to bring their concealed weapons on campus, dormitories, and other residential facilities. It is a popular belief that if more people are armed, there are therefore more people able to stop attacks, such as the one in Newtown or the one in South Carolina, from happening. The logic, while with good intentions, is flawed. Instead of arming teachers, a more logical response is to establish a school resource officer (SRO), who is a trained law enforcement officer, into schools to deter and respond to threats in
In America guns have been a part of the country’s society since it’s birth. Throughout history the citizens of the US have used firearms to protect the nation, protect their families, hunt for food and engage in sporting activities. The issue of Guns and gun control is complex. Weighing the rights and liberties of the individual against the welfare and safety of the public has always been a precarious balancing act. In the United States, gun control is one of these tumultuous issues that has both sides firmly entrenched in their positions. Those parties in favor of gun ownership and the freedom to use and keep arms, rely on the fact that the provision for such rights is enshrined in their constitution. In this climate of
Guns and schools just don’t mix. Of course, this could be arguable from both sides. Only nine out of our fifty states allow guns on campus. Most private universities have the choice to decide if they want to allow concealed weapons on campuses. As for public institutions with the law in its state, they have no choice. Public institutions only have control of what buildings are limited. There are numerous reasons that it could be beneficial, but it can also be a complete catastrophe just waiting to happen. In today’s society, people feel the need to be more protected because of what’s going on in the world. There have been many reported incidents in regards to guns being abused on school grounds. Guns end lives, so it’s imperative that we understand the rules and why they’re so important. In order for people to really understand the pros and cons of having guns on campus, they first must began to understand its safety hazards, retaliation and prevention mechanism.
Another article looks at the Tucson shooting where six individuals were killed as an example (Kaveny, 2016). While the author agrees that the constitution protects the rights of gun owners, she makes the argument that semiautomatic weapons were not what the founding fathers had in mind though and that these type of weapons should not be allowed to be owned by the public (Kaveny, 2016). The author also believes that it would be beneficial to have to obtain a license to own firearms and to purchase insurance for possible damages along with further funding for mental health patients to help keep these mass shootings from happening again (Kaveny, 2016).
The debate over stricter gun laws has been ongoing in the United States for quite some time now. Individuals who oppose stricter gun control laws argue that the second amendment to the constitution of the United States constitute part of the bill of rights that protect the right of American citizens to bear arms, and any attempt to set up laws for gun control will be a direct violation of this (Hofstadter 10). They argue that the primary purpose of the amendment was to ensure that American Citizens had the capability to protect themselves against criminal activities and defend the country against external aggression. From a personal perspective, the recent surge in instances of gun violence in the United States of America indicates that stricter gun control laws are necessary for the safety of the American citizenry. Thus, this paper is going to focus on highlighting the benefits of more stringent gun control laws and why members of the public should support it.
In America, the average amount of people shot per year is 100,000; over ten thousand defenseless people are murdered. The Second Amendment’s proclamation 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” has been an extensive topic of debate. Moreover, the amendment has been one of many debates over the several years throughout America. The discussion of gun control is often debated as to whether or not it is morally right to legally bypass the Second Amendment to avoid unlawful uses of arms. The Second Amendment allows citizens to carry firearms specifically for protection, gun control hinders that right and places civilians’ lives in danger. In short, the U.S. government’s intrusive restrictions on gun laws prevent law-abiding citizens from defending themselves with firearms.
Heller, the court ruled that “the Second Amendment protects a pre-existing individual right to keep and bear arms…including, ‘the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation’” (National Rifle Association, 2011 par 4). Although the Constitution gives individuals the right to bear arms, it does not exclude “prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places…or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of firearms,” (Romano & Wingert, 2011 par 13). In recent years here has been much discussion among the nation’s lawmakers and their constituents as to whether or not the Second Amendment is still constitutional; the question is whether or not the Second Amendment should be revised, to prohibit the sale of firearms to those who do not meet certain conditions and qualifications, or even removed from the constitution. According to a national survey of 1,005 high school students, conducted by Vittes, Sorrenson and Gilbert, “63.7 percent of high school students believe that regulating the sale of guns does not violate the constitution” (2003, pg 12). In the same survey, 64.6 percent responded that they would support stricter laws addressing the sale of firearms, and 82.2 percent of those surveyed, believe that the government should make and enforce laws making it more difficult for
Throughout its history, the United States has had a fascination with guns. Americans have used guns in times of war, for protection, and for hunting. Americans also use guns when they are intent on killing people. When violence happens in school shootings, drive-by shootings, assassination of public officials, or in the workplace and shopping malls, Americans demand something be done. This demand fuels the debate between gun rights and gun control activists. It fuels the debate over the interpretation of the Second Amendment. It fuels the debate on allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons in gun-free zones. This makes us ask the question: Should guns be banned from college
One of the most controversial topics in American society today is gun control. This issue has many people debating how America should perceive the second amendment. Many view the second amendment as outdated, irrelevant, or possibly dangerous in today’s society. Others believe the founding fathers’ beliefs and reasons for including the right to bear arms are often misinterpreted resulting in a fight to protect its place in the Bill of Rights. The pushers for more gun laws and the NRA are in unending debate on whether or not the second amendment continues to be relevant today. In order to understand each side’s perspective, one must know the history of the second amendment, its evolution, and how it relates to today’s society.
The Second Amendment to the U.S Constitution is fiercely debated and interpreted differently among American citizens and argued with between the Legislative and Judicial branches of our government. “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,” (Brooks). Because of the Second Amendment, citizens have the right to possess firearms and use them for protection. When researching the origin of the Second Amendment, its modern applications, and its relevance in today’s society, one can determine the Second Amendment’s current implications on today’s society.
Every year 30,000 americans die from guns while others have the privilege to end up with a disability rather than dieing. The men and women who are diagnosed with a mental illness and obtain guns often commit suicide and crimes such as mass shootings, and murders. Because healthcare providers don't report the mental illness’ of many people to the FBI these people are able to pass a background check when they attempt to purchase a gun. Although the second amendment allows people the right to bear arms, it has become easy for the mentally ill to acquire guns and gun control should be strengthened for this very reason.
The second amendment of The Constitution of the Unites States rules 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.” In recent years this has become a highlighted and popular discussion topic throughout people and media. Typical with American media the subject of gun control is visited with broad stroked of red and the use of fear tactics while completely ignoring the complicated and underling positives and negatives of public access to firearms and the benefits and risks associated with this freedom. Most people do not carry a weapon at all and may question others who do because of the moderately low risk of being a victim of a crime. Those how carry however like to think “Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.”
“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 famous words drafted by the founding fathers into the Bill of Rights. This particular amendment has since then been a major part of American culture. Through the second amendment it has given American citizens freedom to buy firearms of any sort: AR-15s, AK-47s, handguns, and the like for self-defense. However, in light of the most recent mass shootings, people have felt that it is time to change if not regulate the freedom the second amendment grants. That is to say that some believe that there needs to be a solution to reduce if not end the gun violence in America by regulating and restricting the access to weapons meant for the police and military by American civilians. Ultimately, the solution to this social problem of gun violence in America is gun control. What is gun control exactly? From an extreme conservative's perspective, gun control is a means of disarming the public and infringing the right the second amendment grants Americans. What this point of view fails to take into account is that gun control is not about infringing on any right or disarming American civilians. It is about restricting the access and sales of deadly firearms to potential felons who have the capability of using them to commit mass murder. Furthermore, what some do not realize is that the second amendment was written in
"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 " (US Const). Although written over two hundred years ago, the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution is still indispensable today. With thousands of innocent Americans murdered from the use of a firearm every year, there is a strong calling for stricter gun-control laws and regulations. Yet, every day United States citizens are forced to use their firearms for protective purposes, frequently saving their lives. While firearms pose a threat when in the wrong hands, restricting their use to only law enforcement is not the answer to ending gun violence. Though the rights granted under the Second Amendment are imperative and must not be stripped away, there are measures that should be taken in order to prevent gun violence, including the expansion of more stringent and thorough background checks and the increase in mental health screening.
The context of the Second Amendment has frequently been debated in American history. Namely, the constitutionality of issuing restrictive laws on gun control based on the Second Amendment has caused controversy. In the last fifty years the prevalence of this topic has grown dramatically. With the increase in recent tragic events, such as school shootings and homicides, guns laws have become a common topic. Gun control activists have often sought stricter restrictions and laws to prevent citizens from purchasing and possessing guns in general. While there are many interesting arguments on both sides of the issue, it poses an important question on our inherent rights, as guaranteed
“The second amendment of The United States Bill of Rights is my concealed weapons permit, period.”- Ted Nugent. Saving lives one by one starts with limiting the purchase, sale, and use of guns in America. According to Alexander Lee, the political and social debate over the question of how much gun control is appropriate and it has been regularly discussed within the last decade. Shootings such as Sandy Hook, and Tucson shootings have raised the government’s awareness on guns and possible restrictions and regulations. Gun talks are discussed with the question, “Will controlling guns cut back on violent crime rates?” Although many guns are open to be sold to the public over 18, there are traditional gun laws that limit who can own them. These laws include sell restrictions to the mentally disabled, the age in which you can obtain a gun, background checks, and dishonorably discharged military personnel. Gun control laws could have a positive effect in America by reducing homicide rates, but at the same time, citizens still have the right to bear arms under the second amendment under the U.S constitution. Gun control laws do not mean the absolute confiscation of guns, but rather reduce the amount of power a gun and the amount of ammo that a gun can hold.