A person never knows if their life’s base between life or death, when there is a terrorist out in the community willing to come out and kill many citizens for no apparent reason. Proposition 63 would regulate the amount of ammo a gun should have and have no more guns with large magazines. With large magazines it is easier for a terrorist to kill more people in less time, but with proposition 63, ammo would cut off shortly for a gun owner and have their background checked to buy ammo or a gun. Will the ammo shorten would have an impact on every gun owner, but would be better because no gun owner would have to have a gun with more than ten bullets in their magazine unless they have a good reason or profession that required to have more than ten bullets in their charger because if they do not the people trying to buy the product have bad intention to use the gun and large amounts of bullets. Proposition 63 would have a good impact on cutting off bullets because there are many people out in the community that should not have a gun with them, because they do not have a good intention when having a gun. People in favor of Proposition 63 agree that preventing weapons …show more content…
Being able to stop a person with a gun and prevent him from doing a crime would add up to saving thousands of lives. Stopping crimes that can happen at any moment, when people have full access to purchasing ammo or a gun can lead and would most likely end up being used for crimes that when least expected they will occur. Crimes are actions that are not planned and would be done when less expected and all starts when a person purchases a gun or ammo without a background check and with proposition 63 we would have less ammo roaming around and would have a small decrease every year people get caught not having the right requirements to purchase what they need to do harmful
If Iowa was the only state in the United States, what city would you live in
The language of this proposition is misleading only focusing on positive outcomes rather than negative ones. Since Proposition 47 got passed November 4th of 2014 , within that month or two criminals were being released. They walked the street like they owned it. What many voters did not realize while voting is that they are okay with jeopardizing the safety of not adolescents but adults. Everyone's safety is being jeopardized. Statistics by the FBI show that crime rate has actually gone up due to the Proposition. People are actually taking advantage of this Proposition.,they know they will not get arrested for any misdemeanor crime, so they go and do it. I have experienced hand in hand with this Proposition. In my neighborhood their
I proposed this change because I believe by amending the constitution in a way that I mentioned we may not able to promise that no mass shooting will happen in the U.S, but this new amendment for sure stop many mass shootings and gun violence to occur.
The 26th amendment gives U.S. citizens who are 18 years old or older the right to vote in elections. In 1971, the 26th amendment was passed by Congress on March 23rd and added to the Constitution on July 1st. During World War II, the argument over reducing the voting age from 21 to 18 was a long-debated topic that continued over to the Vietnam War. This debate started because men who were under the age of 21 were denied voting rights but were being enlisted to fight for the United States. While the United States was focused on WWII, President Roosevelt decreased the military draft age so that people who were 18 were able to be drafted into the military. The youth voting rights movement used the saying “Old enough to fight, old enough to vote” as a slogan for their movement.
Nelson Mandela once stated, “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world”. Arizona understands how powerful and important education is which is why they are going to correct their way by fixing their public education funding. They plan to do this by passing Proposition 123. Proposition 123 is a ballot that will settle a years-long lawsuit, and provide money that Arizona’s K-12 public schools will have access to without raising taxes. There are those who are hesitant about it and are voting no. However, I believe this is a fantastic idea because this is a stepping stone to a better funding, teachers deserve better pay and resources are extremely important when it comes to learning.Knowing Arizona is ranked 49th out of 51 states per pupil in K-12 spending you would
The bill simply calls for the use of more regulation and awareness when it comes to who is purchasing these firearms and making sure that the ones that do purchase the firearms are not felons or domestic abusers. Although this bill will not stop the act of gun violence, it will significantly reduce the deaths associated with gun violence through the use of background
Safety over rights or rights over safety is the question that the proposed 28th amendment makes U.S. citizens question. Michael Moore’s proposal is a contemporary approach on gun control in current day 2017 where fears of terrorism and mass shootings are relevant. Despite Moore’s new proposals Arizona citizens will better benefit by voting no on the proposed 28th amendment. This amendment will heavily affect Arizona as a limited constitutional carry state because it will not provide necessary help for times of need and will limit and infringe upon the rights assured by the second amendment.
In 1971, the 26th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified, granting eighteen-year-olds the right to vote. Before this landmark decision, citizens of the United States “had to be at least 21 years old” in order to cast their vote in an election (National Constitution Center, n.d.). It was the escalation of the Vietnam War that led to this expansion of voting rights. During the Vietnam War, thousands of eighteen-, nineteen-, and twenty-year-old men were drafted into military service.
I respect your opinion on why you do not support Amendment 2, I completely understand where you’re coming from. It probably will be easer for the public to get marijuana, however the Amendment is in the best interest of those who need it. People out there are truly sick and they deserve something that could possibly help them that isn’t going to cost them an arm and a leg, and for now medical marijuana is the answer. There are going to be people who try to abuse the system in order to get what they want/need, but for now I truly believe this is the best thing we can do to.
The debate for gun reform is at a boiling point, because of the mass shootings that have been mercilessly tearing bullet-sized holes through the fabric of the American people, for the past 10, plus years. As a people, we can no longer sit idly by, without demanding change in the form of gun legislation, that would protect, we the people, while learning in classrooms, worshiping freely at church, or while attending country music festivals. Although
Immediately after the Sandy Hook shooting, lawmakers began reinforcing the idea of gun control and started going back into history to update the official law. [So now that we have looked at the history of the gun control law and the factors involving it we can look at some of the benefits that could come along with having it or not having it] II. Main Point: This law has raised such chaos across America, that there has to be a reason for both sides to have a fair fight. We are going to look at what benefits both sides of the debate are looking into to determine their
Mass shootings are increasing in the United States, and gun control advocates are seizing the opportunity to push anti-gun legislation to deter gun violence in America. Guns and the Second Amendment have come to the forefront of political rhetoric, leading to conflicting views between lawmakers on the future of gun legislation. Republican lawmakers are encouraging law abiding citizens to acquire firearms and to defend themselves against acts of violence by criminals. On the contrary, Democratic lawmakers believe the only way to slow gun violence in the United States is to remove guns from society. While certain politicians believe strict gun laws would protect the American people, the proposed policies would make our nation more vulnerable
just ignore bans. The only two things passing a law of this nature would accomplish
A big controversy in congress is passing a law to Tax ammunition/bullets to a gun. This will not just help the country from crime, it will help the economy. “Today almost 65% of people own a gun and 50% have live ammunition to that gun” (Domenech). Taxing every bullet to every gun in the entire country will generate millions of dollars. Another idea is to have gun collection days and ammunition collection days. Obviously the more guns you bring in, the more money the government will give to you. If none of these ideas work, congress can at least limit the ammunition to a gun in a house. The thought of having a gun
This illustrates One Of Today’s Most important issues because gun control has been a controversial subject. To this day it’s been discussed by many people if the people should have the right to carry a gun and they have been trying to compare and contrast all the pros and cons of passing a law of this nature.