The Pros And Cons Of The Second Amendment Debate

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.

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

In the Second Amendment, it gives people the right to bear firearms. This means that most people can own a gun legally and use it how they want. Some can use them for hunting, target practice, defense, or for a collection. As of now most people can go to a gun store, maybe pass a background check, fill out some papers, and come back with a weapon. If you buy it elsewhere, you might not have to pass or sign anything.

A hot-button topic in the world of U.S. politics today is the controversy over whether or not new gun laws need to be instituted to keep Americans safe. We are a nation that believes in the Second Amendment, and one that sticks to traditional values. With this, comes a great deal of incongruity, which makes for a very sensitive debate on gun control. On one side of the spectrum, we have those who take a more liberal stance; while they do in fact support the second amendment, there is no doubt that the U.S. has evolved significantly since the Constitution was written, hence creating a need for strict gun laws. On the other side of the spectrum, conservatives argue that as soon as executive action inhibits the fundamental principles in which

“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.” In our political climate today, there is an ongoing debate on the meaning of the second amendment. In particular, much controversy centers upon whether we should make gun control laws more strict like the laws in DC, or if we should make laws to encourage and embrace American citizens to own firearms and carry them in public, similar to laws in Vermont. In fact, some citizens wonder why we even have the second amendment in the first place.

In the Constitution, the second amendment gives the American people to have the right to possess and bear arms. This amendment has been the most controversial issue since guns have been around. Issues such as gun control and gun ownership have remained a matter of debate and have been floating around in Congress. It has been rumored that Congress is forced to draft certain legislation in order to come up with a law against unlawful use of arms, and only owning them for safety purposes. When it comes to congress, Republicans and Democrats have debated their views on gun-control in the United States to best fit the overall well-being of the citizens. These different points of views have caused many discussions on how this controversial topic should be handled and whether or not it conflicts with the second amendment. Throughout this topic, Republicans and hardcore NRA supporters favor with less strict rules of gun-control while Democrats want stricter rules such as a background check for every citizen that poses a threat to either the United States of America or the average citizen. The debate on guns in America has essentially become one more distracting, off-point topic in culture wars.

Does the second amendment have a place in the year 2016? I personally don’t believe so. Before I go into great length, or become long winded, I will say that I am not for the second amendment. And with my upbringing, it would surprise a lot of people. I’m from the south. However, I am liberal, I come from a long line of conservative republicans and war veterans. Not to mention, my mother, by the age of 15, could take apart and put back together a machine gun. Guns as a hobby, I can respect, but it isn’t my cup of tea. Guns are dangerous, regardless if I am, or if the person holding one is. We owe it to ourselves, and to our fellow Americans to want to make the country we call home safer with every generation.

As today's society struggles with the continuous problems surrounding gun violence, many Americans are questioning whether or not our Second Amendment is applicable to our society as of today. Undeniably, our circumstances as a nation in the United states differs dramatically from when The Constitution adopted the Second Amendment in 1791. This document 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." At this time our founding fathers had no idea of the challenges we would currently face as a nation and recently the United States recorded its deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S history. Proving that the Second Amendment has not been applicable with today's society, it being outdated, the frequent tragedies through gun violence, and the lack of regulations currently being displayed.

Through the years there has been an ongoing discussion on the Second Amendment and how it should be clarified. The issues that are being discussed is whether the government have has the right to manage guns. There are possibly two sides to this Second Amendment debate, where one is the collective side, which that the right was given only for collective ambitions. The collective side is in more favor since it has stricter gun control laws, that being said the government feels that having stricter laws on guns would lower the number of crimes that are committed with guns which would help save thousands of lives. Meanwhile gun control laws may subtract the criminals’ access to purchase or obtain firearms, in addition, the same law would limit

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 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?

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.

Gun Control is robbing us of a human right. People are entitled to carrying and using guns wherever and whenever they want. Without guns, defenseless women have no way to protect themselves. Only leftists and hippies want gun control in our flawless country, and they’re ruining it for the rest of us gun-toting patriots. In A.W.R. Hawkins’ article “Gun Control: The Ultimate Human Rights Violation,” Hawkins makes a solid stand against gun control, and states that it “actually steals part of our humanity.”

Gun control in the United States is a very controversial topic in today’s political society, leaving the nation divided into two sides with two strongly opinionated beliefs. This all started with the increase in the amount of mass shootings and an overall increase in gun violence. The two sides consist of the liberal point of view and the conservative point of view. The liberals believe that the availability of firearms to the people in the country is a major issue, and that the U.S. government is at fault for the mass shootings due to the lenient regulations on guns. In retaliation, the conservatives argue that having a gun is a God given right, that the Second Amendment of The Constitution. Although the availability of guns is seen to be

“The second amendment of The United States Bill of Rights is my concealed weapons permit, period.”- Ted Nugent. Saving lives one by one starts with limiting the purchase, sale, and use of guns in America. According to Alexander Lee, the political and social debate over the question of how much gun control is appropriate and it has been regularly discussed within the last decade. Shootings such as Sandy Hook, and Tucson shootings have raised the government’s awareness on guns and possible restrictions and regulations. Gun talks are discussed with the question, “Will controlling guns cut back on violent crime rates?” Although many guns are open to be sold to the public over 18, there are traditional gun laws that limit who can own them. These laws include sell restrictions to the mentally disabled, the age in which you can obtain a gun, background checks, and dishonorably discharged military personnel. Gun control laws could have a positive effect in America by reducing homicide rates, but at the same time, citizens still have the right to bear arms under the second amendment under the U.S constitution. Gun control laws do not mean the absolute confiscation of guns, but rather reduce the amount of power a gun and the amount of ammo that a gun can hold.