Gun control has been a major problem recently, in fact, in 1939 the Supreme Court ruled a case called “United States v. Miller.” This case states that the Second Amendment only protects guns suitable for a well-regulated militia. The Supreme Court has not had any other Second Amendment cases since 1939. However, the most recent ruling since 1939 was the Brady Bill, in 1994, which is a United States Federal law that requires a background check and five-day waiting period to determine whether the buyer of the handgun has committed a crime or no, but does not address the Second Amendment rights. Although, the Brady Bill period came to an end in November 1998. In 2008, the Supreme Court then ruled a case called, “District of Columbia v. Heller” confirming that the United States Constitution protects an individual 's right to keep and bear arms, but all handguns are required to be locked or disassembled when in homes. Two years later, Supreme Court ruled McDonald v. Chicago that states that local and state governments cannot prohibit handguns. Currently, gun dealers are required to use the national system to do a background check on all gun buyers, with an exception of antique guns. The system is setup to let the dealer know instantly if there is any reason the same cannot go through, which allows buyers to no longer having to wait to complete a purchase of a gun. However, over the past six years, there seems to be a drastic increase in conflicts dealing with gun control. In
Gun control has been a big topic for the past decade in the united states. These debates will rise and fall time in and time out after something horrific happens in the state. Anti-Gun supporters do not realize that it is extremely difficult to regulate something in the states that is a big portion of our economy.Would stricter gun laws change anything? So far statistically It has been proven otherwise one must consider how a citizen would defend themselves when they are faced with terror. How will they defend themselves if there are restrictions on guns? It seems that some states that have stricter gun laws are where the most shootings and also where more terrorists attack take place. It seems that gun control is only pushed when shootings gradually get worse and worse. But why are these anti gun groups not speaking up when police brutality happens or when a racial hate crime occurs? Anti-Gun groups do not look at the bigger picture and try to understand that it is more than guns. Gun control almost plays Zero role in murders
The United States has 88.8 guns per 100 people, or about 270,000,000 guns, which is the highest total and per capita number across the globe. The current public gun control debate in the United States seems to be placed on standby until it is sparked up by a major mass shooting. There were at least 126 mass shootings between January 2000 and July 2014.(pro). Opponents of more gun laws accuse supporters of using a horrific event to further a lost cause, saying that more laws would not have prevented the shootings. Advocates of more gun control often want more laws to try to prevent the mass shootings and call for smart gun laws and background checks . Pew Research Center did
The matter of gun control has become an increasingly controversial issue. Whenever, a nationalized tragedy ensues that involves gun violence, the question on what to accomplish regarding America’s gun control takes center stage. While exploring this topic, this essay will attempt to discuss the circumstances that prohibit a person from possessing firearms, also regulations to prevent these persons from possessing firearms. Upon reflecting on the personal side of the gun control debate, stricter gun control begins to infringe upon our rights, as citizens and they should concentrate on enforcing the current laws in the books, instead of making additional laws.
Americans realize that the 10 Amendments produce the Bill of Rights which were made to prohibit government powers from infracturing the basic individual liberties; therefore, the changing of one of the Amendments would offset the basic individual liberties granted by the founding fathers. Countless U.S. news stations and support groups portray the mass shootings, gun violence, other gun propaganda, or naturally the use guns, as a scapegoat to support gun control. Guns do not harm people--people hurt people (And I have no doubt that this has been aforementioned extensively) however; the implementation of gun control in the U.S. will diminish the 2nd Amendment--the right to bare arms--as well as prevent the citizens the right to protect
A standout amongst the most warmed and talked-about about issues in this day and age is that of weapon control. In recent past years, there’ve been many cases reported in light of gun use. Since then there are debates going on either there should be gun control bills. There have been high quantities of passing’s including guns in the United States, and individuals are starting to stand firm against the savagery and search for approaches to take care of the issues. Firearm control is exacting stricter and more brutal directions on owning and conveying guns, which numerous individuals accept is the answer. In any case, arguers trust that the privilege to have firearms is a piece of each American 's sacred rights. Gun laws are the reason for much rough wrongdoing in America, and they should be changed to make it less demanding for Americans to buy handguns, convey them as hid weapons, and better protect themselves.
The issue of government regulation over firearm ownership is given through the protection of civil rights and liberties as written in the US. Constitution and bounds government to use its authority and resources to minimize loss of life and property (Johnson W. C., 2014). This is just as true as the 2nd Amendment, a secured civil right to bear arms. This is where the debate is centered on, the point of determining how much firearm regulation should government impose upon the people. Though the initial Amendments to the Constitution revolved around the rights of the individual, the task of government, through the Constitution, is to serve the general citizenry. The debate and struggle is more of a search for balance between
Since the beginning of time humans have employed the use of weapons. These have been used as a tool to provide food, security and sometimes to cause harm or as a final resolution to conflict. The loss of life that sometimes involves the use of guns has prompted the Authorities to enact certain regulations that are generally known as gun control laws.
The gun control laws have become a serious concern, with increasing incidents of crime using guns. It is being reported that in America, around 25-40% of people own guns. Guns are possessed by civilians legally or illegally. The Second Amendment states that “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.” (Masters, 2016). Federal Laws have put limited Law Control regulations; however, Individual States have regulated their own gun control laws. Despite the separate gun control regulations in different states, the federal law is superior which is evident by the Supreme Court’s historic decision in 2008, in the District Columbia Vs Heller case, where it supported the
Ever since the 2nd Amendment was ratified, gun control has been a flaming topic of debate in America. The politics surrounding this debate could affect the lives of millions of Americas who already own firearms. Americans are looking for information regarding what a conceal carry permit is and how to obtain a conceal- carry permit so that they may formulate their own opinions on the issue. Investigating further, citizens are confused with the numerous conceal-carry permit classes, instructional courses, and the background checks of carriers. Who is allowed to apply? Where shall they be allowed to carry? Using data gathered from a multitude of sources, the average citizen might form a new frame of reference concerning this topic with
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.
In recent years we have seen our nation be split on the issue of gun control. We have seen many violent shootings and innocent people dying because of gun violence. Some Americans believe we need strict gun laws to protect our children and ourselves from these horrific tragedies. Other Americans believes it is our rights as Americans to posses’ guns and we are entitled to that right in our constitution. There are also some Americans that are stuck in the middle and can see both sides but recent events have definitely caused this issue to be in national news weekly if not daily. The benefits of establishing better gun control in America has an unknown outcome but something needs to be done to protect the lives of our children and communities. Although I believe it is our right, as Americans, to posses a firearm, I now see that there could be many benefits to tightening gun regulations in our country.
Gun control has been a controversial issue in America for over a half-century. This issue has two sides. On one side, there are people who oppose gun control and believe that it is their right under the second amendment to own one or more assault weapons. Republicans such as Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, Governor Rick Perry of Texas and Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina are against gun control. On the other side of the issue, there are people who favor gun control and believe that background checks should be given in order to keep these weapons out of the hands of people who are mentally ill. Democratic politicians such as House Majority Leader and Senator Harry Reid of
Gun control has been a serious topic in the city of Chicago for decades. Hundreds of shootings occur in the city on a yearly basis, resulting in countless injuries and casualties. Who is to blame? Are guns really the problem, or are the people who own them the problem? Getting a firearm in Chicago becomes more and more difficult every year, yet the shootings seem to increase. Some say this is due to and increase in gang violence. Others say that the city is not monitoring the sales of guns and who is able to purchase firearms. According to Vidal “Illinois still has one of the strictest gun laws in the country.” The city is in controversy on whether or not to ban handguns entirely. 2012 was a record year for homicides. According to Vidal
Gun control is a topic that has gained a lot of momentum lately. There have been several horrific tragedies that have occurred over the last few years. The debate continues whether access to guns is directly linked to crime and violence and identifying the steps needed to prevent such tragedies in the future. The public and those in public office have been reviewing whether more stringent controls on gun purchases and on gun owners with a mental illness should be implemented and what these controls might look like. A person’s mental health should be considered when purchasing a firearm because of incidents like Sandy Hook.
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.