The Controversial Issue Of Gun Control In America

School violence is becoming a worldwide issue, but is a particular problem within the United States. Violence can occur in many ways such as; bullying, school gangs, physical attacks, and fatalities involved with guns. School shootings have been on the rise over the past several years. To bring awareness to school violence, teachers, staff, and parents need to be further trained in noticing warning signs of depression and anger issues which may lead to bullying and disrespectful learning environments for all parties. In addition to awareness within schools, the debate over gun control has been a topic discussed for many years in hopes to curb school shootings.

Although the 2nd Amendment only contains one sentence, the interpretation of it can be misconstrued if the use of critical thought is not applied during the analysis. Supporters of gun control argue that the ambiguous language in the 2nd Amendment leads to confusion about the interpretation. That in itself warrants further discussion about rewriting the 2nd Amendment or simply eradicating it. Also, the provision is outdated and no longer coincides with the times. In regards to the addition of “well regulated militia,” guns were meant to protect people from tyranny and any form of militarized government suppression. With that said, firearms should alternatively be restricted from other uses with

Essentially Gun control is an effort to restrict or limit the production, shipment and ownership of guns. But over the years these discussions are only brought up when tragedy strikes, while america does have the highest deaths per year this isn’t by gun it is by other events Guns are second for most deaths. It seems that there are more deaths by gun by cops with events from police brutality alone. Police brutality is at a

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

When one comes to count on the pros and cons of gun control there comes many points in mind, one of them being diminished murders by guns: There is some trustworthiness to the possibility that substitution systems for crime by firearm are less deadly and hence diminishment or expulsion of weapons ought to decrease manslaughter rates marginally. The issue is whether somebody needs you dead sufficiently awful they tend to ensure they completed the employment and in spots where weapon bans have become effective they have had no measurably critical

In the past few years Gun control has become a hot topic throughout America. With all the shootings going around the United States, we are faced with controversies over gun control. Americans believe that their government is going to do whatever is best for them, but is that true when they are trying to strip us of our rights that were created for us over 300 years ago. Our country has been thriving with the amendments and laws set before us, and today we are trying to change them. But by just changing a few laws is that really going to stop a criminal from getting what they wanted, there criminals for a reason. Our second amendment gives us the right to bear arms and protect our selves from enemies foreign and domestic. This is the foundation of country; we fight to keep the right that were given to us, so that we can protect our families, our country, and our freedom.

Gun control in the United States is a controversy that is talked about every single day. The topic of gun control tracks back from when the second amendment was created. Since 1791 when the second amendment was instituted, individuals of the United States have had no issue with it until the 20th century. When people started speaking about open carry and talking about which kinds of guns were allowed to be bought and registered for civilian usage. Questions ranging from why it was necessary for a civilian to carry an AR-15, was controversial because people thought that there was no reason for someone to carry that unless you were in the military and have a thorough background check.

The exact meaning and purpose of the Second Amendments context has caused major controversy and confusion for some time, this would be due to its unusual sentence structure. 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" (U.S. Const. amend. II). Most advocates of gun control would agree that you

Close your eyes and relax. Imagine that you are in a time of 236 years ago, and imagine that you are one of the few people that had the privilege of writing the country’s constitution. It would not take long until you get to the second amendment. This 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” (Davis). This amendment has extreme importance, and should not be taken lightly. However, this amendment is not accepted like it used to be, and it is a big controversy in the United States today. Should the public be allowed to have weapons, or should the government take them

The United States is known for many things. We’re number one in Moon landings, number one in diversity, and number one in guns per 100 people. As a left-wing Democrat, I find this very concerning and dangerous, but many others feel differently about the topic of gun control, and more specifically, background checks. Most opposition to extensive background checks are Republicans, and this can be seen portrayed in traditional Republican values like safety, security, and family. Through the opposition of explicit restrictions to our Second Amendment right, gun control opposition enacts values like patriotism and nationalism with strong traditional American beliefs.

Few topics can generate more of a divided opinion than gun control. In reviewing the following case study, “Case 8.4: Have Gun, Will Travel…to Work”, several important questions will be discussed involving moral and legal rights of both the employee and the employer. This case involves the dilemma of a company’s rights to protect its employee’s verses an individual’s right to bear arms. In 2002 several employees were terminated for violating company policy by keeping guns in their vehicles while at work. Although at the time there was no state or federal law prohibiting the company from dismissing an employee for having a gun in their vehicle, this action by Weyerhaeuser, a Seattle-based timber-producing company set in motion a legal

“Gun control (or firearms regulation) is the set of laws or policies that regulate the manufacture, sale, transfer, possession, modification, or use of firearms by civilians (Wikipedia).” Some presume that this means banning guns. In actuality, gun control only acts to protect citizens through enforcing the appropriate use of firearms; it does not ban the weapon. By implementing stricter gun laws and regulations, there would be a large decrease in death rates and help prevent violence in America.

Gun Control is a hot debate topic, where people have been divided into two different viewpoints. The majority of states has supported their colleges to carry guns in case of a mass shootout. While the majority of liberal and democratic oppose carrying guns onto school property. Some states such as Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Oregon, Texas, Utah, Wisconsin, and Mississippi has already passed the law to allowed students to carry concealed weapons on campuses to protect themselves from unwanted mass shooters. It sounds good when a politician says all college students should carry concealed weapons, but will it have any effect or will it be a big mistake. The majority of people present their arguments that Gun shouldn’t be allowed in Campuses. A campus is a place where students gain knowledge it’s not a battlefield of guns or place where students fear with their classmates. This day 's people are being irrational about mass shootouts, media also has a huge responsibility on this issue, media has the power to put fears on audience lives. There are many solutions in order to fix this problem. Deploying more security could be a solution, it will also create more jobs. Simply handing guns to teachers and students won’t solve the problem of mass shot outs, not everyone is a hero among college students as well, and there might be some students or faculty member who are same likeminded as shooters. The another solution which could be effective is deploying more police officers onto

Here in United States most of the people believe in the Freedom of individuals and Homeland Security but recently the gun control issue has come up as an important argument topic among the American citizens after several tragic mass shootings. In fact, the 2nd amendment that allows the American citizen to carry a firearm in 1791 was convincing because the public safety in that years was not sufficient and people were in needs for a self-protection weapons. However, nowadays there are several claims about changing the 2th amendment as one of them Mr. Barrett in his article (Gun control and constitution) says “Emotional claims that the right to possess deadly weapons is so important that it is protected by the federal Constitution

The controversial issue of gun control is one of the most debatable topics among politicians and civilians alike. This is because of the complexity of gun control and the long history that is related to the subject. Gun control is typically an effort, by the government, to create legislation that regulates the sale and use of firearms within the country. There are various arguments that surround this topic which include gun-related violence, accidents, self-defense, murders, suicide, constitutional rights, and so on. James Q. Wilson, a professor who has taught at Pepperdine University, Harvard University, and the University of California, Los Angeles, and a published author of several books, take a negative stance on the subject of gun control. Wilson contributed to the gun control debate in the last few years with his written op-ed article. According to Wilson, there is no possible method to eradicate the hundreds and millions of guns that exist within the country, restrictive gun laws will not significantly affect the United States’ murder rate, and that guns play an important role in self-defense in everyday lives. Contrary to what Wilson believes, strict gun control is necessary and should be enforced to ensure public safety because gun laws have the power to produce a positive outcome in the long run, reduce gun-related violence, and reduce the numerous risks that gun ownership open.