Persuasive Speech On Gun Control

Amendment; this is the Amendment that is used as the basis for each American having the right to bear arms. It has certainly been a subject of conversation in the US; proponents argue that no one has the authority to take that right away from US citizens while opponents asking for an amendment that would allow the amendment to acclimate to current realities of the 21st century (Levintova, 2014). To understand the problem with the second amendment, one has to go back to the origin of the said law; the bill of rights was first created in 1789 along with the first ten amendments, to understand the intent of the authors of said amendments.

Attention Getter: “The battle over guns has proven to be one of the most dangerous in America’s culture wars- and with the murder of 58 people in Las Vegas Sunday night, the debate over how to regulate them has begun again. The argument over gun control isn’t merely about safety. It’s about identity. The gun has transcended its function as a weapon to become a powerful cultural marker. It can signal what kind of person you are, and often to which tribe you belong”. – amp.usatoday.com

The second amendment of the 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 Law) For over fifty years, the amendment has been interpreted to the courts that people individually do not have the right to own gun, but rather that this right is to be regulated by legislatives on the federal,

1). The researchers then ranked all 50 states from 0 to 28 based on their score (ProCon para. 2). “The higher the score, the more restrictive the gun laws in that state,” stated the researchers (ProCon para. 2). “This study is a very important addition to our understanding of the connection between gun control and gun violence,” said John Roman, a PhD, senior fellow. “In addition to the general relationship between gun safety laws firearm deaths, also suggests that increasing the number of gun safety laws increases the reductions in firearm related deaths. So the benefits just get bigger with more laws” (ProCon para. 3).

While presented through an amendment in the Bill of Rights, the right to bear arms has been and continues to be a subject of controversy often due to the advancement of firearms over time, and overall vagueness of the Second Amendment. Examples of vagueness discrepancies are often found in interpreting the concept of what it entails when supporting a “well-regulated militia.” The development of firearms has also proven to be a major subject of debate as modern day weapons are significantly more advanced than what existed during the creation of the Second Amendment. Lastly, the argument of which citizens the Second Amendment should protect or not protect based on their criminal background or other factors has been an ongoing debate. These subjects do not cover all aspects of debate surrounding the Second Amendment, but have been tried in many Supreme Court cases and are subjects of controversy in modern politics.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution is one of the most debated issues in the history of the United States of America. The Second Amendment 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.” CITE

Now, a few words about the Second Amendment, which will be the primary focus of future columns. The United States is one of a handful of countries which has protection of the right to keep and bear arms in a constitution. For many years, the public debate was whether or not the Second Amendment protected an individual’s right to keep and bear arms. That question was laid to rest by the United States Supreme Court in the 2008 landmark decision, District of Columbia v Heller.

According to Dr. John R. Lott Jr, world recognized economist, this is not the case at all. Lott holds a Ph.D in economics from the University of California of Los Angeles has rigorgously decidated to finding the correlation between violence and guns within the United States. According to this findings “Consealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States” several misconceptions where cleared in a scienfic manner. First, the number of consealed handgun permits are increasing each year. Just within the past 2015 year, 1.7 million additional permits were issued. This has resulted in a 15.4% increase in permits within one calendar year. Where John R. Lott Jr. makes a distinction in his research center, that although permits are increasing, this does not neccesarily mean that violence is increasing as well. To the contrary belief violence is decreasing at a significant rate. Just between the years of 2007 and 2014 murder rates have fallen to an dismounting rate of 4.2 per 100,000 people. Looking at both variables closely this has represented a 25% drop in overall murder rate while the percentage of permits have increased at a rate of 175%. This provides a basis that lets concerned families, verterans and students that the possession of Firearms is not a direct correlation to violence within

to bear arms in the United States. If you put gun control into effect that will take away their

Gun control has long been a controversial topic in the United States. In 1791 the Second Amendment was ratified in the Constitution (Shallope, 1982). Since its ratification, the amendment has been interpreted two different ways depending on the acceptance or opposition to the issue (Shallope, 1982). Those opposing lax gun laws interpret the Second Amendment as only applying to the prohibition of the federal government interfering with state militia; it does not apply to individual citizens (Shallope, 1982). Laws concerning individual citizens rights to purchase, own, and carry a gun vary from state to state. Even though license requirements still differ across states, as of the year 2013, when Illinois became the last state to permit the carrying of a concealed handgun in public, the act of concealed carry is now legal in all 50 states (ProCon, 2017). In particular, laws concerning the possession of guns on college campuses fluctuate from state to state and even throughout individual institutions (LaPoint, 2010). Currently, 18 states have issued

First of all, regarding to the 2nd amendment of the U.S. constitution. “People have the right to bear arms.”

The Supreme Court has been very careful in limiting the rights of individuals to carry firearms. They also have been debating whether the authors intended that the Second Amendment applied to individuals or state militias. In T S v. Cruikshank, USA 92 542 (1875), the court ruled that laws could be passed regarding gun control. The court said that "the law that are specified is that of" bearing arms for a lawful purpose. 'This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Nor is it in any way dependent on that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that there is no violation, but this, as we have seen, means no more than that Congress shall not be infringed This is one of the amendments that have no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government. leaving people to seek their protection against any violation by their fellow citizens of the rights recognized, what is called, in the city of New York v. Miln 11 Pet. 139, the "powers that refer to the merely municipal legislation, or, perhaps, more properly called internal police, '' not surrendered or restrained

law that all 50 states would allow concealed carry murder rates have increased (Parker 1). A

With each mass shooting, defined as four or more victims having been killed indiscriminately, antagonism grows between both sides of the gun control argument. 40% of Americas population own guns that’s roughly 130,000,000 people who own guns in America, that is a lot of people that own guns. Also every year there are 36,000 deaths by guns only including the ones they have found out about and 533,000 in the

The United States of America is a nation of massacres by military-type assault weapons. Aware of the deadliness of these weapons and due to public safety concerns clearly outweighing the benefits of personal ownership of military-type assault weapons, the United States passed the 1994 Federal Ban on military-type assault weapons. This ban was notably effective during the 10 years it was in effect. However, the Ban automatically expired in 2004. Since that time, the number of U. S. mass murders has markedly increased. Attempts to reinstate the Ban, most recently the stricter 2013 Ban, have all failed. Nevertheless, the less restrictive 1994 Ban did pass the Senate and House of Representatives at one point and was successful. Therefore, the 1994 Federal Ban on military-type assault weapons should be reinstated.