The Issue Of Gun Ownership

Imagine waking up in the middle of the night to a complete stranger who is in your house, threatening to harm you, and your family, and you cannot do anything about it. Imagine, not being able to go target shooting or hunting, because there are laws passed to prevent you from owning a firearm. The truth is, more and more people in this country are trying to restrict law-abiding people from owning firearms due to the overwhelming rise in gun related crimes. As law abiding citizens, the constitution gives us the right to bear arms. Whether it is for recreation or protection,

Across the United States of America a debate rages on daily, that debate is whether or not to allow the public to obtain and operate firearms. The right to bear arms has been fused together with American culture for hundreds of years. Many advocates for gun control are against citizens of the United States being able to possess and operate firearms, even though it is a necessary evil and is a right of every man and woman across the country. Gun control in the United States is a dangerous topic but one that needs to be addressed. American citizens have the right to bear arms, and the evidence is there to prove that it can be done effectively and safely.

Without a doubt on of the most morally debated topics currently within our society is the topic of gun control. Mass shooting has been running rampant within our communities and gun violence in the United States is at an all time high. At page value there should not be a debate on the topic. The easy solution is to legally restrict the ownership of guns from all citizens. However, the way our constitution was developed the people of the United States have the right to bear arms and the government cannot infringe on that right. Many believe that the removal of guns from private citizens would leave them vulnerable to those who do not follow laws. The right to bear arms is simply about protection and should not be tampered with. Since

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

For quite some time now, there has been big controversy about whether we should have the right to bear arms and how we should be able to obtain weapons / how we should be with them (gun control). The 2nd Amendment ties into gun control and stirs up a lot of debate. Some people believe it’s a danger to society, and some people believe that taking away guns would be taking away our freedom in a way. If we had stricter gun laws, people say there would be less tragedies and mass-shootings. But on the other hand, it’s said that we need guns to defend ourselves maybe in times like this. Although it’s in the Constitution some people just don’t agree and say that the 2nd amendment can be interpreted different ways. There is serious disagreement about whether guns protect liberty or threaten it (Waters, Timothy William, 2017).

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.

There is a huge debate about if they should abolish the right to bear arms. Throughout the years, the United States has been having an increase of conflicts caused by crimes form guns. People are wanting the U.S to take action, and strict gun control. In the past 26 years, Congress has not known how to response to the gun violence. Since the year 1990 till present there has been a lot of Acts passed down to try and reduced gun crime, but it has not been very effective. However, some laws that were passed were consider unconstitutional, so they were removed. As the years go by, there has been more shooting sprees and massacres which are making people feel uneasy, and in danger. Every year, there has been shootings in schools where tragically

Death by firearm would decrease if a ban were placed, but other equipments capable killing would merely take it’s place. For example, suicide by handgun will be replaced with drug overdosing. Gun control is often a sensitive topic to discuss due to the involvement of human life, and often can stir debates. Both parties for and against gun control have claims that closely counter each other. Those for control believe that crime would decrease if weapon sales were governed. However, this won’t reduce crime at all, for the criminals would find other means of intimidation.

Hello I will be discussing current gun laws. Basically, I will be disputing the statement that we in American should have stricter gun laws in all cities in efforts to keep down gun related crimes and murders. Compared to states that have strict gun laws, states that have lax or no gun laws do not have less crime rates. In fact, out of the 50 states that allow citizens to have a concealed weapons license only about 10 have crime rates that need their laws to be revamped. That is only 5%. So here are some statistics and points that will get you to see things from a proven standpoint.

Correspondingly banning guns would in fact reduce the amount of guns in public hands, but it would increase the crime rates. Imagine a situation for a moment. The government outright bans guns and what happens then? Who would there be to actually enforce this ban? Would the police go door to door asking for your guns? Would they have an all out gun war? Or would they even attempt to take the guns from the people? Would it be worth risking their lives? Now imagine that they do manage to get guns from anyone willing to turn them over. What would stop criminals from still having these weapons? Do you believe that fear of the police alone would be enough to stop criminals. Would it be enough to stop these people from robbing every place in sight knowing that they will face little resistance? These are some of the most important questions to ask before even thinking about banning guns. They clearly all lead to a clear answer that if guns ever were banned that it would only bring upon civil war and higher crime rates. According to Pat Roberts a writer for Huffington Post and Forbes, “Banning guns for civilians would have very little if any net effect on murder and suicide rates”. The main reasons that he gives for this is something called supplication. If guns were to go away another way of murder and suicide would just take its place.

What would you say if I were to tell you that over the past seven days, approximately 200 people have been killed by guns in the United States? What if then I said that from 1982 to 2012 in the U.S., there have been 62 mass shootings? And then, what if I told you that of the shooters in those 62 shootings, the youngest was only 11 years old? This child, along with a 13-year-old accomplice, stole 7 guns from his father and the other child’s grandfather and ambushed people outside of a school, killing 5 and wounding 10 (“A Guide to Mass Shootings in America”, April 18, 2016). The Second Amendment to the Constitution gives the people the right to bear and own arms, but it has been misinterpreted because when it was created, it was intended for states to have a militia to prevent the government from imposing unfair legislation as King George did to the colonies. Now people look at this Amendment as an unconditional right to own a gun no matter what. This was not the intent of the Amendment originally. It was originally intended to keep the citizens of this country safe and the way to do this, at the time, was to let them have a gun. Now there are many more ways to keep people safe other than owning a gun. The current laws regulating the purchasing of firearms and ammunition in the United States are practically nonexistent, and so badly upheld and enforced that they might as well not be there at all.

If the right to bear arms is abolished it will produce the death of countless lives. Many people believe that gun control signifies the safety of weapon operation and new laws, but it’s more of a restriction of obtaining them which leaves many Americans helpless when tragedy may occur. For one to truly be able to have gun-safe zones are to have people who know how to properly utilize and be knowledgeable of the weapons they own . For the United States being able to have control of the people who have guns is crucial due to the mass shooting that have occurred in previous years. Consequently, gun control is ineffective due to its restriction to obtain guns, doesn’t protect the right to bear arms, doesn’t create an environment of gun safety, or to have people who own them be any less ignorant about guns and their proper use and purpose.

As time has progressed, the issue of gun ownership has become more and more of a debate. With the development of new technology that can lead to devastating destruction, it is extremely difficult to overlook the harm that this weaponry could ensue on the safety of our nation. As stated in the second amendment of the constitution of the United States, “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” ("The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription") The framers, however, could never have known the potential for destruction that our present weaponry can cause. So, the question to this day has been, to what degree should the infringement of our right to bear arms be prevented? There are many different possible answers to this question, however, to me, only one answer seems to stand above the rest. The government of the United States, in order to uphold the rights for the general good of the majority of United States citizens, should infringe on this right to the degree necessary in order to provide the utmost amount of safety for their people while continuing to recognize the original intentions of the framers.

Everyone has a different opinion about the issue and what should be done to solve the problem, no matter what is done the main question is would restricting the ownership of firearms be a violation of our 2nd Amendment? Our rights are in place to protect our freedoms, but when is it permissible to infringe upon those rights for the protection of the common good? The standard which is in place simply states, that your rights are in place until exercising your rights violates other rights or places others in danger. Meaning that I have the freedom of speech but that does not allow me to yell fire in a movie theater because it would endanger the common good. So now that we understand that one person’s freedoms stop where another’s starts, the question is does owning a gun infringe upon other’s rights?

“The US has the highest rate of gun ownership in the world and the highest firearm homicide rate in the developed world” (Martin). While America is transfixed about creating the perfect world, there are more important concerns dealing with the lives of individuals who are in danger if guns are prohibited. The problem with guns is obvious, but has not been dealt with because it is a large problem that takes time, money, and patience that the government is not will to do or wait for. While others believe that it is better to fix the problem through perusing peace, nevertheless, there are ways to combat the present evil of society, such are; Smart guns, physical and mental evaluations, and an ample amount of time to process thorough