Civil War Pros And Cons

I am against the Second Amendment which is the right to bare arms for several reasons. Growing up from the city of Chicago which is one of the most violent city's in the world I have seen a lot of violence. I have heard of a lot of relatives and people I knew or my friends knew where either killed or was shot. There was a lot of violence even before they had the conceal to carry law, so being all for the second amendment would go against I believed in.  Growing up I never wanted to bare arms because I felt it should have been in the hands of the law to take care of criminals etc. and not kids or people themselves. Since moving to Las Vegas things are 100% different from where I come from. You still hear about people you

Your blog brought up many interesting points. It seems as though you are supporting the making of an amendment to counter the 2nd amendment in the Constitution. You stated that times have changed and you are absolutely right. There are not wild animals living on the streets nor are there state militias like there were in the 1700's. However, you also talked about the conservative view that many ignorant Republicans hold. I suggest that you check out this link http://heedinggodscall.org/content/pfctoolkit-10 as it has some astonishing numbers on injury or death related incidents due to firearms. Now check out this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate. As you can see, countries with little

The militia held fast to the belief they brought with them from Europe, the belief that the militia were brought here for the purpose of neighborhood self-protection. Militiamen did not sign up to be deployed, away from their farms and families, for more than a short period of time or great distances. They held “religious, political and economic beliefs,” and had a “negative view of debt and usury,” and no need for “fame and wealth” (Moreland & Terrar, 2010). They were a self-sufficient people and their farms produced all that they needed. In contrast, the Continental Army was wage workers that got paid to kill in order to make money off of the war. The militia wanted no part in

Central argument: “The nature of that country requires indispensably that an unusual proportion of the force employed there should be cavalry or mounted infantry.” is that the more soldiers we have the more protection the nation is. Having not enough protection other enemies can come and terrorize the nation. Protecting those people they will feel safe around their home. Jefferson know those protection help his people feel safe.

Another point is the constitutional right of a self regulated militia, which must be protected no matter what. Access to a state militia is a specific right protected by the United States Constitution, within the second amendment. The Bill of Rights states, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state”, which implies that throughout the sovereign states, a self enforced military is a liberty available to all who desire to take advantage of their rights. Those who aim to protect their fellow citizens should have the ability to do so: “They claim that the amendment protects the general public, who were viewed as part of the general militia, as distinguished from the “select militia” controlled by the state.”(Gun

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.”1 These words, spoken by Abraham Lincoln, foreshadowed the war that became the bloodiest in all of the United State's history. The Civil War was a brutal conflict between the North and South; brother against brother. With slavery as the root cause, Southern states had seceded from the Union and were fighting for their independence. They became the Confederate States of America (CSA) and were a force to be reckoned with. The Union, however, put up a fierce struggle to preserve the country. If the Civil War was to be a war of attrition, the North had the upper hand because of its large population, industrialization, raw materials, railroad mileage, and navy. But if the war was short lived, the

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.

The Second 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. Even though this amendment has been around for hundreds of years, people still argue over what it means and if it should still apply today. The two extreme sides of this argument as stated in Henry Winkler’s book are the Gun Nuts and the Gun Grabbers (Winkler 15,45). One side argues that there should not be any guns at all, and the other side argues that everyone should have a gun. This discussion has been around for decades, and I believe that it is not going away anytime soon. There are a few arguments as to why I believe that the government shall not and cannot remove guns from American citizens. First, I believe that I have a constitutional right to own firearms due to the second amendment. Secondly, everyone should not be punished for the actions of a few lawless individuals. Thirdly, the removal of firearms would be costly, hard to enforce and unlikely to succeed, and finally, gun control laws are racially motivated. Through the use of what I believe combined with historical examples, my goal is to persuade a “Gun Grabber” on why the government cannot take away my guns.

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." In reality, what that really meant was that only those in a state regulated militia were the ones protected by the Second Amendment, though we know that has changed over time. Some assumed that the Second Amendment was set in place to protect us from the tyrannical government. Can we say that those changes have been for better or for worse or have things really changed at all? As citizens of this free country, I believe that we should be able to keep and bear arms, however; I also believe that there are a few concerns that should be addressed.

The issue of concealed carry has led to arguments in recent years, with those opposed arguing that it is a danger to society, and those who support it saying it ofers protection from the dangers of society. The increased media coverage of shootings—the “media contagion” factor outlined by the American Psychological Association—has caused the awareness of firearm danger to rise (Media). Further, the gun culture of the United States has promoted the widespread use of firearms since revolutionary times, making guns prevalent in society (Kennett). These factors have grim results, making the United States the leader of developed countries in gun homicides — with almost five times more gun deaths than in any other developed country. These data found,

The controversy of Gun Control is a topic that is needed to be talked about, especially with children in the upcoming generations. Gun Control is defined as a set of laws posed by a government, especially the United States that regulate the sale, possession, manufacturing, and use of firearms by its civilians. Written in the Second Amendment in the Constitution, is people have the right to bear arms. Although it is stated in the Constitution, people of today's era are taking these rights completely out of context. A lot of Americans are misusing these firearms, which is sadly, leading to disastrous events such as school shootings.

Gun Control has been a controversial issue in the United States for a long period of time. There are two sides to this debate, the pro-gun lobbyist who believe they should have the right to exercise the 2nd Amendment right which states that the Federal Government does not have the right to infringe the people from keeping and carrying a firearm. The Anti-gun lobbyist wants stricter run regulation or even ban gun sales all together. This essay will be analyzing the laws regarding gun regulations through the history of the United States. The essay will also look into the 2nd Amendment rights while also giving it a definition. This essay will also be analyzing some of the more important Supreme Court cases in which the ruling of the Supreme Court

Gun control has been debated quite a bit over the last couple of years due to recent domestic terrorist attacks. These attacks have caused political views on gun control to waver, regardless of our Second Amendment rights. Sociologist would see gun control as a way to divide our country by our belief. For example, a conservative would stand firm with their belief in the Second Amendment, where as a liberal would demolish those rights in an instant, if given the opportunity. The issue with gun control is that the government makes it more difficult for citizens to buy guns for protection, when criminals would just steal a legal gun and kill someone if necessary. So the main purpose of gun control is not to take all the guns away.

The 2nd amendment of the U.S. Constitutions protects the rights of people to bear arms, such as assault rifles. Are guns to blame? Gun control isn’t the answer. It’s whoever is behind the trigger. I do believe that the United States needs better mental health reforms to help those in need that way no more mass shootings happen. Have you heard or seen the phrase “guns don’t kill people, people do”? As Americans our rights are established on the constitution and the amendments. The 2nd amendment has been a debate since Obama’s administration. After so many mass shootings, it still comes down to, whos fault is it?

Almost daily, there is a story on the news about gun violence and the discussion comes up about gun control. What is gun control? As defined by Marriam-Webster, gun control is the “regulation of the selling, owning, and use of guns,” (Marriam, 2017). When is there too much control? How does it affect the law-abiding citizen? These are questions that need to be taken into consideration while taking a position, as gun control effects everyone in the United States of America. Gun control needs to cease due to the fact that it takes away from the rights and protection of the American people whilst increasing government control.