No Rights Is Absolute And The Threat Of Gun Violence

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in 2008, developed the initiative “Run, Hide, Fight” as a response strategy to an active shooter event. In the event of an active shooter they suggest run or evacuate first, if evacuation is not possible, hide and barricade doors, and as a last resort, fight back if your life is in imminent danger (DHS, 2008). All public places are vulnerable to active shooter attacks, but hospitals differ due to the vulnerability of its patients. Evacuation may not a possibility for all patients, as some may be non-ambulatory due medical conditions, or incapacitated due to anesthesia or sedation (e.g. surgical patients, ventilator dependent). Another factor increasing patient vulnerability is the patient’s ability to understand commands (e.g. Dementia, language barriers). In order to establish effective preparedness strategies, they should be tailored to the hospital environment and specific units (Cormier, 2016; Jacobs et al., 2017).

     Are you willing to sit back and become a victim of violent crime or allow the government to tamper with your civil liberties? In recent years, anti-gun politicians have attempted to control guns in the name of crime prevention this is an assault on the Second Amendment rights of US citizens . 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.” Not only did our Founding Fathers focus their debate on the right of people to keep and bear arms, they devoted energy to encouraging future generations to defend theses freedoms. In defense of gun ownership, Alexander Hamilton said, “If

There are a myriad of issues that citizens of the United States do not have enough education about. These people may only know one side, or may not know any side at all. Various topics range from abortion to gay rights. One issue in particular that deserves a great deal of attention is gun control. Certainly many Americans have heard little snippets about the opposing views on the issue; however, not all people have enough education to make informed decisions on where they stand with the issue. Numerous questions can be brought up from not knowing any information, but one specific question that Americans should be concerned with is, is gun control a violation of Americans’ Constitutional rights?

The Second Amendment (Amendment II) to the United States Constitution protects the rights of individuals, concerning the right to bear arms. Amendment II was adopted on December 15th, 1791. Gun rights and gun control groups alike have been lobbying Congress for decades to craft legislation in their respective favors. Twice in the past two years the gun issue has reached the nation’s highest court. In the 2008 Supreme Court case District of Columbia vs. Heller the court ruled that the Constitution protects an individual’s right to own a gun for personal use (Blocher, 816). Excavating the gun debate from the constitutional rubble may be a step in the right direction, as it could enable a more direct discussion of the proper role of gun rights and gun control in the United States, freeing from misunderstandings and misinterpretations of constitutional doctrine (Blocher, 815).

The United States Constitution was constructed from a set of rules, also known as amendments. These were written with the intention of securing the basic rights of all United States citizens. It usually serves as an outline for the laws of the land by dictating the powers of the people and what is acceptable under the watch of the United States government. The history behind these amendments began in 1789 when it was proposed and drafted by James Madison. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as part of the first ten amendments contained in the Bill of Rights. (History.com Staff 2009)

Gun Control laws are violating Constitutional rights and stopping individuals from adequately protecting themselves, resulting in tyranny. The Second Amendment guarantees “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 word infringed means actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.). A synonym of infringed is restrict, which means put a limit on; keep under control. Thus in both a literal and figurative way, gun control is unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court ruled that states and the national government can’t deny people's constitutional rights.

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.

In reality, there are limited places that violence cannot happen, however, we are often surprised by some of the places violence does take place. One of the places many don’t expect violence to take place is in the hospital. Hospitals are designed to promote safety and provide medical care and nursing treatment for sick or injured people. Unfortunately, on January 12, 2016 a hospital security guard and a police officer endured near-fatal shootings by a drug-affected patient in Nepal. Rachel Olding, the author of an article written February 4, 2016 points out some concerns, thoughts, and ideas for improvement taken from hospital workers who have seen and experienced hospital violence firsthand. Hospitals need to be a place of safety for their patients, staff, and visitors.

Every year, thousands of people, innocent or guilty die from gun violence in the United States. Gun violence is despicable while guns are still lawful with a permit. The Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights of the United States 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). This statement means that the government were to ever become corrupt the people have the rights to guns in order to protect themselves. This amendment was written because of the Revolutionary War. The founding fathers didn 't want the people to be defenseless like they were against the British so they guaranteed that right. However, our founding fathers failed to think about the disadvantages of giving access to guns in our country so easily. Many people debate that there should be more limits on gun control considering the many deaths and mass shootings that have occurred in the United States. Our country leads all nations in gun violence yet some still debate that it 's in the constitution for a reason, for the protection of the people.

From learning about the grit and perseverance of soldiers in the Revolutionary and Civil War to the modern day struggle people face to achieve gay rights, what stuck with me the most throughout Social Studies this year were our discussions on gun control. This stuck with me because gun control is a topic that has it's rooted in Revolutionary war but still affects people today in our modern society. Despite more than 30,000 people being killed every year in America from gun-related violence, the 2nd Amendment still currently stands. It 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." This basically means

“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,” many will recognize this as the 2nd second, however, few will know the true purpose for why it was written. The intent of the amendment was to allow the general populace to own personal firearms without restriction, so that, in the case of a government takeover or attack on their well being, they would be able to defend themselves. Regrettably, this has largely been forgotten. A vast majority of the left now believes that the 2nd amendment is just an excuse for conservatives to play with dangerous toys. They look at all of the gun violence and think that the cause is the right to own firearms, so their solution is to either restrict it or repeal it all together. Countries such as Australia, Japan, and England give them their reasoning for strict gun control. Advocates conclude that if America implements the same harsh gun regulations of these countries, then our gun violence rates will reflect theirs. This is not the case at all, but it makes sense, if it works there, then why wouldn’t it work here?

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.

The United States has roughly 88.8 guns per 100 people per capita. That equates to nearly 270,000,000 guns- the highest total and per capita in the world (gun-control.procon.org). The United States also owns roughly 35-50 percent of the world’s civilian-owned guns, despite being just five percent of the world’s population (cfr.org). Guns are widely available in the U.S. In fact, even those on the terrorist watch list are legally able to purchase firearms (factcheck.org). The FBI's terrorist watch is comprised of some 800,000 names of people who are known or suspected of terrorist activities. According to a 2013 Congressional Research Service report, being suspected of terrorism is not “in and of itself a disqualifying factor” for people purchasing

It feels like every day, countless news stations, websites, and social media users break the tragic story of yet another mass shooting in the US, a fact that is shared by almost no other developed countries. Clearly there is something anomalous about the U.S., why else would the U.S. be the only country where this regularly happens? The answer lies in one key difference between the United States and other developed countries, its policies on gun control and ownership. The 2nd amendment to the United States Constitution states, essentially, that every US citizen has the right to own guns, and that the United States Government may not infringe upon those rights. The truth of the matter is that controlling American Citizen’s access to firearms is the only solution to the undeniable issue of mass shootings and gun related homicides, a fact that is backed up by the example of several other developed countries, in which guns are controlled and incidents of gun homicide and mass murder are far less common than they are in America. Controlling guns in America is a task that has been halted numerous times by the antiquated constitutional stance on American armament, and is the only sensible option for lessening the atrocious tragedies that are seen so often on U.S. soil.

In today’s world violence can be expected anywhere at any time. This includes what was considered at one time a low risk area, the medical facility. Today the incidence of violence is increasing. There are two types of violence the first is lateral violence or aggression which is amongst hospital or medical personal. The other is external factors consisting of patients or visitors instituting violence or aggression among themselves or against healthcare workers. This is known as a code grey in my facility and all male staff not currently engaged in patient care are supposed to respond.