Pros And Cons Of Assault Weapons

United States is a country that has problems with gun control, and this issue has many debates between whether or not people should be allowed to carry a gun on them. This free county not only for speech and religion, but also allows people to have the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment of the United States was written by our Founding Fathers,“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” (Government). The main purpose of the Second Amendment when our Founding Fathers wrote this amendment was to help the American citizens to defend themselves from the government at that time, and other countries from invading their properties. However,

However such bans are ineffective at preventing mass shootings as “Adam Lanza had plenty of time to reload his guns, as did the shooters at Texas Tech in 2007 and Columbine in 1999” (Domenech n.p.) and “assault weapons…applied to guns used or carried by criminals in at most 2 percent of all gun crimes” (Domenech n.p.). Because of the ineffectiveness of gun control, background checks, and assault weapon bans, the best way to prevent mass shootings is to ban gun use altogether.

There are many views about gun control especially about assault weapons. People are both for it and against it. The people who are for the ban believes the weapons can only be used for violence. They don’t want to recognize that people against the ban have several different reasons to own their guns. These reasons can vary; some people just want protection; others want to use their guns for sport. This pleasurable pastime will also provide a variety of food to supplement family grocery supplies and to help people save on food costs. Instead of making more gun control laws the ones we have should be enforced.

We have had several of the worst mass shootings in our nation's history in quick succession over the past few years. Certain legal restrictions and acts from our government could have prevented numerous deaths. Common sense background checks and limitations to cartridge size and assault weapons would surely have saved many lives at the Las Vegas Massacre, but certain men and women claim that these restrictions violate their second amendment right. They claim that guns aren't the problem. That guns don't kill people, people kill people. So limiting access to devastating guns is just avoiding the problem. The Second Amendment right presumably violated by common sense gun control is “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” (Second Amendment). The Second Amendment states that for the need of a well regulated militia to protect the security of the free state and the right for the people to keep and bear arms. Militias have been inactive for decades so in a sense the intent of the amendment is no longer relevant. Based on the 2nd Amendment, the Constitution is not still a valuable and viable document in modern America because it stands in the way of thorough background checks, training courses, and its vague wording and absolute intent make it inefficient to maintain peace and order and should be amended “To the People of the United

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right of the people to possess armaments for their own defense—this is one of the biggest conservative ideology arguments that the anti-gun control side stands by. In addition, banning handguns prevents people from an effective means of

The second amendment clearly gives Americans the “right to bear arms” which led to the founding of our country (“The Constitution of the United States,” Amendment 2). Gun advocates believe the new legislation will separate them from their rights because putting laws on their firearms will be against Amendment II. The right to bear arms for self-defense is protected in all states as well as the U.S. Constitution.

If there was some type of ban on assault weapons, many lives could be saved. Assault weapons are becoming very attractive to criminals because of their capacity, “an assault weapon is generally considered to be a semiautomatic weapon with a detachable ammunition magazine and some type of advanced feature typically used in military-grade weapons.”(Assault Weapons) For example, most military-style weapons have high capacity of ammunition, meaning they can kill a lot of people in a very short time. Implementing

The second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right of people to bear arms and was adopted in 1791. It guarantees all Americans "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." It is more described as supporting the natural rights of self-defense, resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defense of the state. Former Chief Justice of the United States, Warren E. Burger writes an essay regarding “The Right To Bear Arms,” that originally appeared in the Parade Magazine in the 1990’s that questions if “The Right To Bear Arms,” is an outdated idea. Burger argument is that the gun control would lower if handguns were lowered. He also talks about the”Militias,” which is an army that protects the security of the state. Our “State Militias,” in our time, serves as a huge national defense.

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,

The Second Amendment of the constitution of the United States was adopted on December 15, 1791. “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” (Gun Control Laws). There is controversy on the exact meaning of the Second Amendment. There is also a lot of controversy surrounding guns and gun laws, and what could be done to prevent gun violence and mass shootings in our country. There has to be a way to prevent gun violence, while still upholding the Second Amendment and protecting the rights of law abiding citizens who have the right to own and carry guns legally.

The mounting deaths and associated trauma from mass shootings should motivate us to take action to make needed reforms to our gun laws, focus law enforcement resources on combating illegal gun possession and invest in prevention initiatives proven to reduce gun violence. Assault weapons cause more harm than good when they are able to purchased and owned by private citizens. And while most who do own and use these powerful weapons for harmless, recreational activities or a sense of protection, the fact is that when they fall into the hands of individuals who are not mentally sound enough to possess something of such force, the result is one of horrific tragedy. The government must take into consideration the hundreds of innocent people who have lost their lives as a result of these dangerous weapons, and work on ways to prevent

Some Americans feel that because guns are already regulated in so many other countries, America should just follow suit, while others believe guns both represent and help guarantee our independence, our liberty, and our freedom to make our own decisions. The founding fathers anticipated that gun control could become a serious issue in the future, so they added the Second Amendment to the Constitution. 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.“ Most gun control activists focus in isolation on the beginning of the amendment where the founders wrote that a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state. They then try to argue that only the military or the National Guard should have access to guns, not individuals. In so arguing, however, they completely ignore the last part of the Second Amendment, which provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The founders obviously envisioned that the people would keep and use firearms to protect themselves and their country. Unfortunately many politicians don’t see it that way. Yet, the Supreme Court has struck down firearm bans again and again. The 2008 Supreme Court case, District of Columbia vs. Heller,

A new Quinnipiac survey released this week found that there is a strong opposition to ban military-style assault weapons. Among those who oppose the ban are the millennials, The Guardian reported.

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.” The constitution is clearly saying all citizens have the right to be able to own and carry a weapon or firearm. On June 26, 2008, in District of Columbia v. Heller, the United States Supreme Court held in a 5-4 decision that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home and within federal enclaves (Cornell 1). This is showing how our founding fathers supported the right to bear arms.

The NRA argues that “assault weapons,” or those kind of semi-automatic guns designated in the ban, “have never been used in more than a small percentage of firearm-related crimes.” Some people might say, “Guns are not safe” which in some cases they aren’t. It just depends on who has the gun at the time. We should have a little bit of control on guns just because many criminals purchase guns legally and use them to commit crimes. Background checks should be mandatory when buying any gun from