Gun Reform Recently there has been an increase in high profile tragedies and puts in question if the government should reform its firearm laws. This is one of the most widely debated issue in the media currently. Both sides have strong opinions, those who are for more regulation believe that additional steps to be able to access a firearm is strongly needed. While others believe that if the government adds more restriction then that would be a violation of the second amendment. 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.”. Some read this and what their take from this is that it is their legal right to be able to carry or own a gun, this is called “individual right theory”. Others believe that this was meant for nothing other than to restrict Congress from trying to take away the citizens self defense, this is called “collective rights theory”. This theory is that not every citizen has a constitutional right to posses a gun. In 1939, in the case United States v. Miller, the court took the collective rights theory approach. Congress decided that they could regulate specific types of guns without being unconstitutional. Federal gun laws are regulated to an extent. The NFA places restrictions on the sale or possession of short barrelled shot guns, machine guns, and silencers. To be able to own or purchase these items listed, you will have to go
School should be a place of peace and opportunity, but gaps in the system of gun control threatens the safety of faculty and students. School shootings have killed a total of 297 lives, young and old (Slate Magazine). Gun control has been a continuous nationwide debate for many years. It seems that no one wants to take a stance against guns unless they are personally affected. In order to take control of the matter and prevent more incidents from continuing schools need to change. To achieve a safe environment in schools need to educate faculty, safe and students, heighten security, and assess mental health issues.
What makes gun control reform even more difficult is that many Democrats themselves can’t support gun control without risking their seats. Many representatives or senators come from districts and states that vote Democrat for different reasons, such as union strength in the Midwest or rising immigration numbers in the Southwest. However, states like Wisconsin, Florida, or New Mexico also are strong supporters of guns, putting Democratic lawmakers in a precarious position (Scher 2017). This split in the party makes it nigh on impossible for bills to get anywhere. Indeed we saw this to be true after the Sandy Hook shooting. Senator Dianne Feinstein has been a passionate advocate for gun control nearly her entire tenure as a Senator, becoming one of the leading Democratic senators in the push for gun control (Friedman 2013). Feinstein represents a state where gun control measures such as assault weapons bans are extremely popular (California), so there is no constituent fear from her to back off gun control (Wheaton 2017). After the Sandy Hook shooting, Senator Feinstein introduced a new Assault Weapons bill to replace the previous one which had expired in 2004. It made the sale, manufacture, or transfer of 150 semi-automatic weapons illegal, which had features like magazine releases and thumbhole stocks, restricted large capacity magazines, and used a one feature test to determine whether or not a gun was an assault weapon (Feinstien 2013). Democratic majority leader Harry
Our country wants the best but doesn’t want their freedom taken away. Gun control, something we avoid discussing. We know what guns do, but fail to make any change so we can prevent them falling into the wrong hands. We are taught how to prepare for a shooting, living in fear because of how frequent you hear about shooting in the U.S. This is a major problem, we shouldn’t be hearing daily about how guns are being used to commit a crime. Gun control could help us prevent crime and some of the fear. This is a problem for us because someone could easily get access to a military weapon not needed at all and it is legal. Someone with bad intentions could easily do a lot of damage because of our laws and that needs to change.
Death, violence, individual rights, crime, and cost are many words that arise when researching the controversial topic of gun control. This issue revolves around the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and 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.” Is there a black and white answer or is there a need to find a middle ground? The foundational right must be preserved for an individual to own a gun. However, basic safety measures need to be in place for added protection and security of all Americans. To explore why this balance is the best option, it is necessary to look further into the
One of the most controversial issues in our society today is the topic of private gun ownership and gun control laws. This controversy has arisen mostly due to the different ways that the second constitutional amendment is interpreted. The amendment states that "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" (Lott, 2000). On one side of the issue, there are those that believe that the amendment guarantees the right of individuals to possess and carry a wide variety of firearms. On the other side are those that contend that the amendment was only meant to guarantee to States the right to operate militias.
Throughout the years there has been an ongoing debate over the Second Amendment and how it should be interpreted. The issue that is being debated is whether our government has the right to regulate guns. The answer of who has which rights lies within how one interprets the Second Amendment. With this being the case, one must also think about what circumstances the Framers were under when this Amendment was written. There are two major sides to this debate, one being the collective side, which feels that the right was given for collective purposes only. This side is in favor of having stricter gun control laws, as they feel that by having stricter laws the number of crimes that are being
Guns laws in America are one of the most controversial topics today that are dividing many U.S. citizens. Many people are ignorant to what new gun laws will enforce and what statistical data shows about gun violence. Future Gun laws will be used to control guns in America, making it restricted to own and buy weapons. Although some people say that stricter gun laws will protect people more than concealed carry laws, the reality is that concealed carry laws allow individuals to better defend themselves and their families.
of sixty-two mass shootings done by Mother Jones, about forty-nine of the weapons were bought legally! Twelve of were obtained through illegal methods, and the last one was unknown (Follman). Whether mentally fit or not, loose gun control laws allow those untrustworthy to buy guns and possible commit heinous acts.
Every so often the media and news feeds flood with reports of a mass shooting. Families mourn. In the days that follow, calls to action can be heard, and there is a demand for change. Sometimes minor legislation passes, but in the United States extreme change is rarely seen. Other developed nations provide an opposite comparison. Following the Port Arthur shooting in Australia and the shooting in Great Britain, both countries organized for significant gun reform.
December 15, 1791, the day America’s Bill of Rights was ratified, was the day the initial infrastructure for our country’s basic rights were established. Since then, firearms have been a highly deliberated topic. Even today, the debate over whether we, as a country, should institute stricter gun laws continues to be an ongoing conversation throughout social media, the press, and within our governing bodies. But, since the approval of the Bill of Rights, gun laws have continued to be restricted in order to protect the lives of citizens who reside in America. The initial catalyst for more rigid gun laws was the horrific assassination attempt of Ronald Reagan, which also brought injury upon James Brady who, due to this incident, later became an advocate for gun laws. Ronald Reagan’s potential rendezvous with bloodshed brought about the initiation of Brady’s law as a safeguard to prevent another incident of this kind from besieging our country.
The United States of America has a problem that is growing worse every day. American laws are not protecting its citizens from injury or death. You may think the mass shootings in America the guns used were bought illegally, but “since 1982, there have been at least 62 mass shooter carried out with firearms across the country, with the killings unfolding in 30 states from Massachusetts to Hawaii. Of the 139 guns possessed by the killers, more than three quarters were obtained legally. The arsenal included dozens of assault weapons and semiautomatic handguns.” (Follman). Times have changed and so should our gun laws. The federal government should enact more control on all personal guns in order to reduce
The Second Amendment provides US citizens with the right to bear arms and should include the right to own assault weaponry. The Second Amendment is a right for all American citizens, not a privilege. The two strongest reasons for citizens to own assault weapons are self-defense and defense against tyranny. The Second Amendment allows for US Citizens to legally protect themselves, their families and their homes. Assault weapons in the hands of law abiding citizens can make the difference between life and death; therefore they should be included in the Second Amendment.
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.
Imagine somebody breaking into your home with the intentions of hurting you and your family and trying to take all your valuables that you own in your house, and not having anything to protect your loved ones. Without the protection of a firearm, the intruder could injure or kill all members within the household easily. In the United States, according to the Bill of Rights, a citizen has the right to bear arms, however, recently people have started to believe that guns only incite violence and therefore gun laws need to be more strict. Although, If you own the firearm for the right reasons and go through the process of having a carrying license, then that is within your rights to protect yourself and be able to own the gun. Therefore,
Guns in general are moderated to the the people here in the U.S. A normal citizen who has no gun experience whatsoever can’t just go and buy a fully automatic weapon and shoot it. If a person wants to buy a gun of that sort he/she has to take special classes in order to receive a special license in order to be able to buy a weapon of that sort. That also goes for a person who wants to carry a pistol anywhere they go, they have to get a CHL(concealed handgun license) in order for them to be able to carry that handgun legally. On the other hand there is always a way of