The Freedom Of Speech, And Gun Ownership Rights

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

Most pro-gun ownership often supports their argument with the Second Amendment. However, the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution doesn’t include or mention what types of firearms can be used for self-defense. It would be common sense to limit the sale of guns to handguns or small weapons to protect one’s life. America has the Second Amendment mainly because of the history and it’s been a long tradition of the American people. And it has been further reinforced when the Revolutionary war began and armed civilians or militias won America’s freedom. People don 't think about much of this history anymore, they care more for what the law states rather than how it got started or why it’s been implemented. And because of this lack of interest “attempts to restrict a citizen’s right to own a gun evoke

In the Constitution, the second amendment gives the American people to have the right to possess and bear arms. This amendment has been the most controversial issue since guns have been around. Issues such as gun control and gun ownership have remained a matter of debate and have been floating around in Congress. It has been rumored that Congress is forced to draft certain legislation in order to come up with a law against unlawful use of arms, and only owning them for safety purposes. When it comes to congress, Republicans and Democrats have debated their views on gun-control in the United States to best fit the overall well-being of the citizens. These different points of views have caused many discussions on how this controversial topic should be handled and whether or not it conflicts with the second amendment. Throughout this topic, Republicans and hardcore NRA supporters favor with less strict rules of gun-control while Democrats want stricter rules such as a background check for every citizen that poses a threat to either the United States of America or the average citizen. The debate on guns in America has essentially become one more distracting, off-point topic in culture wars.

In about every nation, gun control has always been an issue of controversy. Gun control laws are quite different from country to country, each possessing different requirements, specifications, and ordinances, so on and so on. What will be examined are the specified gun control laws in three international countries, ranging from Canada, Australia, and Japan, as well as a comparison and contrast of the the similarities and unique differences toward American gun control laws and those in other countries, and finally, the effects of having loose gun control laws. Unlike America, these countries possess stricter laws regarding gun control.

The majority of Democrats believe in the right to bear arms, they just want stricter measures for the buying and owning of weapons to individuals. They are trying to strengthen gun control to reduce the violence ineffective gun control has caused.

The world is a dangerous place to live. Every day, we wake up, send our children off to school and spend most of our lives working. We put ourselves in harm’s way every time we leave our homes. At any moment, we could be killed in an automobile accident, plane crash, gunshot wound or any other random occurrence that happens in this crazy world we live in. There have been so many advancements in technology and medicine to protect ourselves from these lucks of the draw events that life throws at us, but some people seem to have a problem with gun ownership. Gun ownership for many is viewed like the seatbelt of a car or the vaccine given to us to prevent the Flu, it is a form of protection and security. Some people in our country would argue that there needs to be a banning of fire arms or more restrictions to keep fire arms out of people’s hands. I disagree with this idea. I feel that Federal and State governments should not bad firearms or make the purchasing process more difficult. It is every legal citizen right to bear arms, whether it is for protection or sport.

The Democratic Party does not wish to throw out your right to bear arms but they would like to have more of a gun reform that lies within the scope of the second amendment.

In the United States the right to own a gun is enshrined by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The text of 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” (Adams, 2004). The founding fathers borrowed this idea from Niccolo Machiavelli, the Italian thinker. He wrote about the weapons necessary for freedom to defend themselves, to hunt, and to protect the state against foreign invasion. For two hundred years, this tradition has become an integral part of American culture that spawned many cultural phenomena that have become the hallmark of the United States. For example, duels in the desert areas of the

The United States of America is one of the very few countries in the world that allows their citizens to bear arms. The right to bear arms traces back all the way to the times of the 13 colonies. The Second Amendment has been up for many debates, especially in the recent light of mass shootings in the US. But does the entire removal and ban of firearms really work? Gun control and the second amendment has been a never ending conflict between politicians. As we look further into gun control there are more draw backs for the citizens than benefits.

Samuel Wurzelbacher, AKA Joe the Plumber, watched Richard Martinez mourn over the death of his only son who was shot in the Isla Vista rampage. He responded to Richard Martinez with an open letter on a website, Barbwire.com, saying : ‘I am sorry you lost your child. I myself have a son and daughter and the one thing I never want to go through, is what you are going through right now. But: as harsh as this sounds---your dead kids don 't trump my Constitutional rights.’ This is the type of thing that people find so terrible about the Second Amendment; because pro-gun zealots use the Second Amendment to protect their immoral actions, but this is their twisted and corrupted interpretation on the meaning and intent of the Amendment because this is in no way the original premise of the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms laid out in the Second Amendment is just because guns are weapons for self-defense. Precautions are taken on gun control, such as keeping a permanent record of all gun sales, requiring a license and certain mental certifications, and only allowing certain guns to be distributed to the public. Although some may argue that they can also be used to kill the innocent, the removal of guns from the possession of certified citizens will not stop crime, murder, or the death of innocents because guns are not the only weapons capable of these deaths.

It is in our own lives we define what we believe and what we believe in ultimately defines us. Not only do our views of ourselves matter as to who we are, what we stand for, and what we deem important, but also others’ view of our own person are sometimes just as or more important. In reference to the Second Amendment and gun control, the author, Saul Cornell, makes a case for how sometimes every group can think they are the ones in the right, but at the same time, every group can ultimately be in the wrong. It is important to think of not just right or wrong and the rights given to citizens by the Second Amendment to the Constitution, but to think back deeper into history as well and what helped to found the United States of America.

In our world today all sorts of crimes take place every second and there is nothing we can do about it. Not only that, but, with the dramatic rise in mass shootings in our nation comes a compelling division between political and legal agendas predicated on the Second Amendment. I want to emphasize that every single crime is violent whether is involves a handgun, knife or nothing at all. Everyone in our nation knows the law and it is the offender's choices to break it and harm others. With that being said, guns don't kill people, but the deaths of all these innocent people simply comes down to the morality of the men and women behind the weapon.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution says, “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” (Agresti, 2009, para. 2). Based on a simple reading of this, it would seem that people do have the right to own and use firearms. So why are so many people trying to ban guns? Maybe it is because they do not understand what the Second Amendment actually means. Maybe it is because the media only reports the crimes committed with guns and not the lives saved with them. What would happen to the crime rate in the United States if guns were banned altogether as other countries have done? While some people think guns should be banned, it has been

The second Amendment to the Constitution, which concern is the rights to bear arms, has always been a hot-button issue, especially during election season. In the United States, the ability to choose whether or not to own a gun means favoring or opposing the right and the legislation restricting rights that come with it. For years, gun rights and gun control groups alike have been lobbying Congress for decades to sway legislation to their respective favors. The question then become, should the United States have more control over guns? The issue of guns in America should remain in the hands of the citizens because it helps people feel more safe and they help prevent people from becoming victims of crime.

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”. As stated in the Wikipedia cite focused on the second amendment, “The right to bear arms is the people 's right to have their own arms for their defense”. Breaking the exact amendment down in to pieces is as simple as that, but yet throughout our world so many citizens have different thoughts and opinions. In my opinion though, I feel we as American citizens have the right to self-protection and the right to bear arms in our own homes and this right should never change.