The Pros And Cons Of Gun Control

But because the second amendment cannot be changed, the Government should focus on controlling gun violence instead of gun control. As soon as people start focusing on how to stop gun violence without taking away guns, the country will see a considerably fast decline of shootings. Many laws have already been made in the 19th and 20th century to try and stop gun violence. It all varies on each state and what laws they have in place as well. In states with low population densities like Alaska and Vermont citizens are allowed to carry a concealed weapon without a permit but at places like Washington, with the highest murder rates in the country, the citizens there cannot even own a handgun. Different states, have different laws, about guns and whether you can conceal or not conceal a weapon with a license. The second amendment protects people the right to own guns for protection and cannot be changed, but laws that are put in place for gun control can take away certain types of guns and where you have access to

Former president Bill Clinton commented on gun control, saying "When we got organized as a country, [and] wrote a fairly radical Constitution, with a radical Bill of Rights, giving radical amounts of freedom to Americans, it was assumed that Americans who had that freedom would use it responsibly .... When personal freedom is being abused, you have to move to limit it." We 've misused this "right to bear arms" and have been forced to take many precautions regarding the bill. Gun control, or, the lack thereof, has struck a fear in many that has spread quickly throughout the nation. Our culture has ingrained the second amendment into itself, using it as a "pass" to do almost whatever.

America has the highest amount of gun related deaths each year in the world. “In Germany 381, in France 255, in Canada 165 in the United Kingdom 68, in Australia 65, in Japan 39 and in the United States, 11,127” (Moore Michael, 51:15-51:48). Since the United States has the highest number of deaths, it is important to have gun-control laws that restrict people from owning dangerous firearms like machine guns. Gun-control laws should support both sides of the debate. Of course, both sides will not be completely happy with the laws created, but America should have a balance. In 2008, a poll was taken stating: “Adult poll respondents’ views on the meaning of the Second Amendment; An individual’s right to bear arms: Republican 51% and Democrats 41%” (The History of the Right to Bear Arms). Today, the United States is more divided on gun-control than it has ever been. 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”(Milestones in Federal Gun Control Legislation). Unless the Second Amendment is changed, we cannot take the right from others to own guns. However, the government should regulate the types of gun Americans can own and who can own a gun because times have changed and American’s mental health system is broken.

We need to keep the second amendment the same and not change one thing to it. If we didn’t have the guns then we can’t defend ourselves. People want to change the amendment to where we can’t buy guns as easy, and they want to try changing it to where we got to have license to own one. If we keep the amendment the same then we can protect ourselves from any danger: “The first is that the amendment was meant to ensure that individuals have the absolute right to own firearms” (Mount, 2011). This means that we should have it to where we have the right to own guns and to keep it easier to buying and shooting them. Another reason, the military has guns, and they need them to fight: “The second is that the amendment was meant to ensure that States

Some Americans feel that because guns are already regulated in so many other countries, America should just follow suit, while others believe guns both represent and help guarantee our independence, our liberty, and our freedom to make our own decisions. The founding fathers anticipated that gun control could become a serious issue in the future, so they added the Second Amendment to the Constitution. 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.“ Most gun control activists focus in isolation on the beginning of the amendment where the founders wrote that a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state. They then try to argue that only the military or the National Guard should have access to guns, not individuals. In so arguing, however, they completely ignore the last part of the Second Amendment, which provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The founders obviously envisioned that the people would keep and use firearms to protect themselves and their country. Unfortunately many politicians don’t see it that way. Yet, the Supreme Court has struck down firearm bans again and again. The 2008 Supreme Court case, District of Columbia vs. Heller,

“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.” The right of all Americans to bear arms is a right the Founding Fathers held to equal importance as the Constitution itself. Gun control laws directly violate this right and therefore should not even be under consideration. Even if that issue is overlooked, gun control advocates state that in order to reduce firearm related violence, gun control laws must be implemented to remove the violence caused by firearms. Although this may seem reasonable, the consequences of such laws are ironically counterproductive; they exacerbate the problem instead of fixing it. Besides the fact that the American

The people trying to oppose will mostly be gun supporters. They feel that they should rights to guns, so that means all guns. They will make an argument that we are trying to take their rights away. When we aren’t trying to take their rights but limit them from the guns they possess. Pro-gun members will argue that we are violating the second amendment that “the right of the people to keep bear Arm, shall not be infringed” (Constitution of United States of America 1789). What I feel that I can agree with is that all assault weapons are fully automatic due to mean most of them are semi-automatic (aren’t as powerful). “Opponents believe the bans won’t reduce mass shooting deaths at all.” Why do you think they believe that? Is it because they

Gun control is a rising issue in the nation due to mass shootings and murders happening everyday. The 2nd 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.” The argument that guns should be banned is foolish, because the facts are is that criminals will get guns and weapons no matter what. Also, the law abiding citizens deserve a way to protect themselves and their families.

When asked the question from a survey done by the Pew Research Center on how they feel about the homicide rate in the United States, 56 percent of the public said that it was increasing and violent crime was getting worse. The truth is that although violent crime still seems to be happening more and more often, it is actually on the decline of 49 percent since its peak in 1993. The reasons why people feel otherwise about homicides has to do with the increased media coverage of homicides and mass shootings. This coverage usually includes biased opinions to increase viewer ratings and promote their political party’s views instead of using their soapbox that they are on, to do what the news was originally meant to do, tell the facts. Because of

There are two different arguments and interpretations of the second amendment. The first being that only the militia should have the right to bear arms, whereas the second being that the amendment give every citizen the right to bar arms. There is proof that the second amendment gives every citizen the right to bear arms; Thomas Jefferson said that, “No free man shall be debarred the use of arms. ("Second Amendment to the United States Constitution")” Patrick Henery Said, “The great object is that every man be armed. ("The James Madison Research Library and Information Center")” Even James Madison who introduced the bill of rights said that, its amendments “relate first to private rights. ("2014 NRA-ILA Firearms Fact Card")” So Americans have the right to bear arms. Violence is bad in the United States, and guns are being targeted as the problem, however criminals kill people not guns. If a person wanted to kill someone they would find another way to do it. The problem is not the guns it is the criminals. Banning far arms would not stop violence; banning firearms would increase

People often look at the Second Amendment created by the Founding Fathers incorrectly, they made the amendment so that the armed population could battle against the United States Government. Many Americans nowadays look at the amendment and believe it guarantees an individual right to bear arms, but what the amendment was really made for was to protect gun ownership for members of military duties and collective security purposes. Did you know that guns kill an average of 36 people everyday in the United States alone? The United States is the country with the highest rate of civilian gun ownership in the world. Guns should be banned for every single human being on this earth that is not part of military duties and collective security. If guns were illegal for every other person, crime rate would be decreased excessively.

People need to learn how to think before they start trying to change the laws set in place by America’s forefathers. Americans tend to believe the first thing they hear. They believe whatever the media tells them to believe, and they rely on the bias based news sources to tell them what to think. They follow blindly the same way a cow is unwittingly lead to the slaughterhouse. Blindly following is a cultural phenomenon that must be stopped. Through this brain-dead absurdity American rights are slowly being stolen from Americans, and citizens are letting their rights be taken away. One area of politics the media enjoys attacking is the second amendment. The second amendment was ratified in 1791 on December 15, and reads as follows, “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” (US Const. amend. II). Comparable to any debated the gun rights argument has two sides, and has valid points on both sides of the argument.

For many years, people have been pushing the American government to implement new laws that deal with gun control. Supporters of the argument claim that increased gun control will drastically reduce the crime rate in America. Nevertheless, a majority of gun control arguments are formed from strict control of data and emotional appeal. The mainstream media picks up these stories and broadcasts them to viewers without providing any context to them. While gun control activists assert that gun control is necessary, the American government should not ban guns because of the following reasons: potential vulnerability of innocent people being shot at by criminals and the inability for people to defend themselves against their own government.

Will the United States be safer in twenty years if we start to enforce stricter gun control laws? There are many sides of gun control. Whether you are on the pro-gun control method which makes laws stricter and makes it harder to purchase a gun or if you believe in the Second Amendment, which allows citizens in the United States to carry a licensed weapon. Each side has countless arguments for and against their method that can persuade others in residing with their ideas. In the last decade, gun control has been a sensitive topic to discuss with others. But, due to the recent uprising in gun related incidents, we have to talk about it. America should control guns with stricter laws, because they will eliminate the events of a future mass shooting, will start preventing crimes in neighborhoods and keeping firearms away from those who have been recently arrested or have past felonies.

Despite the fact that careless people who use firearms improp-erly cause injuries or even death, guns provide many forms of protection. Our second amendment right is right where it should be, we don’t need the government to try and fix what is not broken. Supporters of gun control always try and make a statement that the second amendment does not give us an auto-matic reason to U.S. citizens to own a firearm. This statement is absurd because the second amendment only gives that right to a well-regulated militia. A well-regulated militia so hap-pens to be the safety of a free state which also happens to be the right of the people to own and bear arms. Adding more gun control laws should not be the solution to higher crime rates, by adding more prisons, more police, harsher punishments and protection is the way to reduce criminal activity. Guns are not the issue, firearms don’t murder people, people, kill peo-ple (Otfinoski 45).