The name of my political party is the Bulwark Party. This name was partially inspired by the word “bull,” while is used to describe male elephants (Shoshani, 2015). Also, the word bulwark means “something that provides protection for or against something (Bulwark, n.d.). Even though the current and sole Republican candidate for this year’s election (Donald Trump) is widely detested for numerous reasons, his Democratic challenger (Hillary Clinton) is also viewed as distastefully, if not more so. Considering this, the Bulwark party is named as such because many Republicans do not have adequate understanding of human nature or the diplomatic tact needed to tackle some of the problems that the United States faces today. As physically stronger social fauna defend their families, it is the responsibility of this country’s citizens to preserve liberty by actively fending for themselves and their families from interlopers who threaten to destroy it. Since physical defense of U.S. citizens (especially those who seek to preserve individual liberty) is a key concern of the Bulwark Party, furthering restrictions on the current process of purchasing firearms is generally not supported by this party. If firearm access was to be hampered regarding American citizens in general, there is not guarantee that criminally ambitious will still seek ways to gather arms and wreak havoc among Americans while comparatively law-abiding citizens will be left with less effective means of defense. The
Many tragedies have occurred recently that have spurred the debate on whether or not we need tighter gun controls. On one side of the debate are the gun control supporters, who claim that the easy access to guns is the primary cause for high rates of crime plaguing the United States. On the other side are people who argue that gun laws will not prevent criminals from obtaining guns, since they will continue to get them illegally. Guns are used for protection when in the hands of people who obey the law. It is crucial to not hinder law-abiding citizen’s ability to possess firearms with stricter gun laws, since gun laws do not lower crime, and guns can keep people safe.
In America guns have been a part of the country’s society since it’s birth. Throughout history the citizens of the US have used firearms to protect the nation, protect their families, hunt for food and engage in sporting activities. The issue of Guns and gun control is complex. Weighing the rights and liberties of the individual against the welfare and safety of the public has always been a precarious balancing act. In the United States, gun control is one of these tumultuous issues that has both sides firmly entrenched in their positions. Those parties in favor of gun ownership and the freedom to use and keep arms, rely on the fact that the provision for such rights is enshrined in their constitution. In this climate of
On average, there is a shooting throughout the country where the victim was left defenseless each day. even with strict gun control laws set in by the federal government, many Americans still have faith in our second amendment. Gun control is proven ineffective, According to Richard Epstein of the New york University of Law, “We can confidently predict that crime will go up unless and until there is a vast expansion of the public police force.” (Epstein 1). While gun control law are in place there are still too many guns for the federal government to keep track of within the country, Richard Epstein states that “upwards of 200 million firearms of all descriptions are available for general use in the United States.” (Epstein 2). With recent
Once there has been an established group of gun right limitation supporters, there will be a stronger case to prove to the congress that this pending issue is an important one and affects everyone’s well-being. In efforts of trying to solve the major issue of gun violence, I plan on getting the message of the insufficiency of security when purchasing guns out by “call[ing] [...] representative[s] in Congress and demand[ing] action on measures like background checks at 202-224-3121” (Kaufman 3). The congress men and women will also understand for the same reasons the parents and adults will understand that tightening the gun security checks will decrease the chance of someone getting his or her hands on such a fatal weapon. With the group of supporters and the congress men and women understanding and relating to the need to be free from danger, the congress should realize that reevaluating the gun laws and updating the rules to have and purchase firearms is a step in the right direction of working toward solving gun
James Q. Wilson a former teacher at Harvard University understands that taking guns away from the common people will only reduce the chance of surviving a possible attack of any sort of intruder.”Those that they cannot buy,
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
Considering the stable condition of the US military and the homeland security systems, the country has the most advanced security system that assures citizens of their safety. Regardless, there exists no need for such extreme measures such as civilians being in possession of assault rifles as a strategy to self-defense. If necessary, cases of self-defense on the part of civilians are well handled by ownership of merely concealed pistols that from records are efficient in subduing any intruder while waiting for law enforcement back up. From self-defense and securing property, civilians’ reluctance to support the gun laws on such high caliber weapons has been underwhelming. Their standpoint has been in possession of such assault weapons. The same standpoints have been the cause for such raging debates on the support or disregard of the government proposition to have the assault guns banned from civilians possession (Miller 533).
The debate over stricter gun laws has been ongoing in the United States for quite some time now. Individuals who oppose stricter gun control laws argue that the second amendment to the constitution of the United States constitute part of the bill of rights that protect the right of American citizens to bear arms, and any attempt to set up laws for gun control will be a direct violation of this (Hofstadter 10). They argue that the primary purpose of the amendment was to ensure that American Citizens had the capability to protect themselves against criminal activities and defend the country against external aggression. From a personal perspective, the recent surge in instances of gun violence in the United States of America indicates that stricter gun control laws are necessary for the safety of the American citizenry. Thus, this paper is going to focus on highlighting the benefits of more stringent gun control laws and why members of the public should support it.
In America, the average amount of people shot per year is 100,000; over ten thousand defenseless people are murdered. The Second Amendment’s proclamation 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” has been an extensive topic of debate. Moreover, the amendment has been one of many debates over the several years throughout America. The discussion of gun control is often debated as to whether or not it is morally right to legally bypass the Second Amendment to avoid unlawful uses of arms. The Second Amendment allows citizens to carry firearms specifically for protection, gun control hinders that right and places civilians’ lives in danger. In short, the U.S. government’s intrusive restrictions on gun laws prevent law-abiding citizens from defending themselves with firearms.
“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.” These are the famous words drafted by the founding fathers into the Bill of Rights. This particular amendment has since then been a major part of American culture. Through the second amendment it has given American citizens freedom to buy firearms of any sort: AR-15s, AK-47s, handguns, and the like for self-defense. However, in light of the most recent mass shootings, people have felt that it is time to change if not regulate the freedom the second amendment grants. That is to say that some believe that there needs to be a solution to reduce if not end the gun violence in America by regulating and restricting the access to weapons meant for the police and military by American civilians. Ultimately, the solution to this social problem of gun violence in America is gun control. What is gun control exactly? From an extreme conservative's perspective, gun control is a means of disarming the public and infringing the right the second amendment grants Americans. What this point of view fails to take into account is that gun control is not about infringing on any right or disarming American civilians. It is about restricting the access and sales of deadly firearms to potential felons who have the capability of using them to commit mass murder. Furthermore, what some do not realize is that the second amendment was written in
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).
Guns are one of the most controversial and debated-upon topics in America today. In the Constitution, Americans are given “the right to bear arms,” and many Americans are proud of and believe strongly in that right. Though, that right has been constantly misused. Homicides by gun are at a higher rate in the United States than any other country in the world, mass shootings are at an all time high (many of which have occurred in the past two years alone), and terrorism has been at an all-time high. So, naturally, it is a topic that needs to be discussed. In the articles Change Your Gun Laws, America (1), author Fareed Zakaria provides the readers with some harrowing statistics on guns and insight over how the U.S. laws on guns need to be managed.
Taking into account of the recent shooting sprees, the gun control debate has started again. However, people have contemplated: “Why does America need gun laws” and “Why are so many states disagreeing about the restrictions that need to be put in place for civilians looking to purchase firearms.” The reasoning for such contemplation is that the fluxuating strictness of gun laws have led to several incidences within states that have strict gun laws due to the fact that the perpetrators of these incidences have purchased their firearms either from black markets, or states where the severity of gun control is at minimal levels.
The context of the Second Amendment has frequently been debated in American history. Namely, the constitutionality of issuing restrictive laws on gun control based on the Second Amendment has caused controversy. In the last fifty years the prevalence of this topic has grown dramatically. With the increase in recent tragic events, such as school shootings and homicides, guns laws have become a common topic. Gun control activists have often sought stricter restrictions and laws to prevent citizens from purchasing and possessing guns in general. While there are many interesting arguments on both sides of the issue, it poses an important question on our inherent rights, as guaranteed
American citizens have been given a right to firearms, and this right should not be infringed. Opponents of this right to firearms argue that, citizens should not be allowed the right to firearms. Their main reason is that, it will help curb violence cases by guns. This has been challenged because; criminals will still acquire firearms illegally and continue terrorizing citizens because, they are fully aware that, they are not armed. Moreover, according to Winkler (89), “Guns do not kill people; it is people who kill people,” and so, denying citizens the right to own guns will not stop any violence. Likewise, the society will not be safe as there will be an increase in violence and criminal activities because the citizens have no firearms to defend themselves.