The Pros And Cons Of The Second Amendment

On December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights was ratified effective by Congress. These first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America promised the states certain rights and freedoms which could not be infringed by the government. After all, the founding fathers knew from experience that men in their weakness were often tempted by power. They had become all too familiar with this when under the control of King George in England. Therefore, in order to protect the future people of their beautiful country, they promised certain liberties which could not be taken away. Every single one of these freedoms is important for the United States of America. However, the second amendment is especially important

I am against the Second Amendment which is the right to bare arms for several reasons. Growing up from the city of Chicago which is one of the most violent city's in the world I have seen a lot of violence. I have heard of a lot of relatives and people I knew or my friends knew where either killed or was shot. There was a lot of violence even before they had the conceal to carry law, so being all for the second amendment would go against I believed in.  Growing up I never wanted to bare arms because I felt it should have been in the hands of the law to take care of criminals etc. and not kids or people themselves. Since moving to Las Vegas things are 100% different from where I come from. You still hear about people you

Your blog brought up many interesting points. It seems as though you are supporting the making of an amendment to counter the 2nd amendment in the Constitution. You stated that times have changed and you are absolutely right. There are not wild animals living on the streets nor are there state militias like there were in the 1700's. However, you also talked about the conservative view that many ignorant Republicans hold. I suggest that you check out this link http://heedinggodscall.org/content/pfctoolkit-10 as it has some astonishing numbers on injury or death related incidents due to firearms. Now check out this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate. As you can see, countries with little

The Amendment left open possibilities, that states could establish voter qualifications equally to all races. Many states took advantage of this position, establishing poll taxes and literacy tests among other qualifications, which were prohibited later with help of Voting Rights Act.

In this essay, I propose to amend the Constitution to modify the second amendment with: A well regulated State National Guard is necessary to provide safety of a free country when needed, the rights of people who pass the background check, shall not be infringed.

The second amendment states the right of the people to bear arms, but can giving this much freedom be threatening? "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." There is a lot of debate with the second amendment, are guns safe or threatening to the people of the United States. This issue greatly concerns me because now I think, is it safe to go out, to go to school, or the movies? This issue concerns everyone not only in the US, but around the world.

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.” The second amendment and its purpose was to provide people with the privilege and right to carry a weapon in the event of a tyrannical government. When it was written, we had been oppressed by British rule. We were new to the concept of a republic and democracy, and looking back at history, democracy didn’t always work, and hadn’t had a great track record. This law was a good way to prevent the senseless killing in the event that our young republic didn’t make it. However, laws wouldn’t necessarily matter in that instance.

The second amendment is a very strong debate that usually doesn’t have a neutral view. In my opinion, guns should be harder to get but not completely taken away. The government was founded on freedom and specific laws that differed us from other governments. As it is the second amendment in the “Bill of Rights” that are always thought of being rights every single American has that can never be taken away. Although the amendment was created in a time that guns were actually for defense and used rather scarcely, the guns now are way too advanced for just anyone to buy.

The second amendment was created during the American Revolution and is not needed in modern times. To quote Roland Vincent, a head author for the Greenville Post, “When the Constitution was ratified these firearms were muskets; today they

The history of the second amendment and the laws that have come after are significant, dating back to 1971, when the Bill of Rights was ratified to the Constitution. The Bill of Rights is a list of amendments that gives rights to individuals and limits government power. 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.” So, the original writing and intent of the second amendment was geared to militia and military only, and it did not address a specific type of weapon. The second amendments intent for individual Americans did not come into question until 1822. A Kentucky court case indicted a man for carrying a sword concealed in a cane. The man was fined $100.00. But it wasn’t until 1856, that the second amendment was affirmed by the US Supreme Court, that the ownership of a gun was extended to individuals as a right.

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

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. Even though this amendment has been around for hundreds of years, people still argue over what it means and if it should still apply today. The two extreme sides of this argument as stated in Henry Winkler’s book are the Gun Nuts and the Gun Grabbers (Winkler 15,45). One side argues that there should not be any guns at all, and the other side argues that everyone should have a gun. This discussion has been around for decades, and I believe that it is not going away anytime soon. There are a few arguments as to why I believe that the government shall not and cannot remove guns from American citizens. First, I believe that I have a constitutional right to own firearms due to the second amendment. Secondly, everyone should not be punished for the actions of a few lawless individuals. Thirdly, the removal of firearms would be costly, hard to enforce and unlikely to succeed, and finally, gun control laws are racially motivated. Through the use of what I believe combined with historical examples, my goal is to persuade a “Gun Grabber” on why the government cannot take away my guns.

The second amendment was likely created because while Britain had ruled America, there was a standing army in the colonies. The Americans no longer trusted standing armies. Instead, they had they had state militias that made up of volunteers. This is important because it helps insure that tyranny will not occur by spreading out the privilege of governing military forces to officials that are elected by the people. The second right protected in the second amendment is the right to bear arms. There is has been much debate over the meaning of this part of the amendment. While some people believe that owning guns protects the right to self-defense, others think that, unlike the time that this bill was passed, personal gun are not necessary to Americans’

The 2nd amendment of the U.S. Constitutions protects the rights of people to bear arms, such as assault rifles. Are guns to blame? Gun control isn’t the answer. It’s whoever is behind the trigger. I do believe that the United States needs better mental health reforms to help those in need that way no more mass shootings happen. Have you heard or seen the phrase “guns don’t kill people, people do”? As Americans our rights are established on the constitution and the amendments. The 2nd amendment has been a debate since Obama’s administration. After so many mass shootings, it still comes down to, whos fault is it?

According to a transcript by Mary Lomtadze-Jackson, the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution 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." (Christian 2016). The general understanding of the second amendment is that it was a law that was passed to allow common citizens to possess firearms. It, therefore, has a number of advantages and several shortcomings as well. I would like to begin by discussing the pros of this second amendment. Mary Jackson was an aeronautical engineer and a mathematician, she was an advisor to national aeronautics and space administration in the United States of America. She writes a transcript on pros and cons of gun control after introduction and passing of the second amendment.