The Right To Own Guns Essay

I have had guns in my life since I was young. I served eight years in the military, and have shot in competitions for many years. I also love the outdoors, and enjoy the ability to put food on the table that is natural. I think the reasons for keeping the right to bear arms are so important that if the American people lost that right; it would mean life changes that many would be unwilling to make.

Gun control is a vital necessity to the welfare of our nation. Many people out there are supporting the “anti- gun control cause” with the excuse of “self-defense”. I believe that not everyone will handle a gun for self-defense. The possession of a gun is a sign of power. One of the bigger ambitions that one has is to have power and the easier it is to obtain a gun; the faster a criminal will gain power over an innocent person. When one is in possession of a gun, that person has complete control of their actions and may act upon the weapon however the person may please even if they know that their action will cause harm to defense-less people. There are many deaths caused by guns out there that could

     Gun control is a very controversial issue among society at present. Many feel guns are the cause of a great amount of crime. This has been an especially popular topic recently in lieu of the shooting at Columbine and other high schools across the country. Are these crimes reason to take away our freedom to bear arms? I do not believe so. The average person uses guns mainly as a means of protection. If limitations are placed on guns, they will only stop the average American from obtaining a gun. The real criminals out there will still be able to obtain guns through the black market. Every American should have the right to protect them self.

We have had several of the worst mass shootings in our nation's history in quick succession over the past few years. Certain legal restrictions and acts from our government could have prevented numerous deaths. Common sense background checks and limitations to cartridge size and assault weapons would surely have saved many lives at the Las Vegas Massacre, but certain men and women claim that these restrictions violate their second amendment right. They claim that guns aren't the problem. That guns don't kill people, people kill people. So limiting access to devastating guns is just avoiding the problem. The Second Amendment right presumably violated by common sense gun control is “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” (Second Amendment). The Second Amendment states that for the need of a well regulated militia to protect the security of the free state and the right for the people to keep and bear arms. Militias have been inactive for decades so in a sense the intent of the amendment is no longer relevant. Based on the 2nd Amendment, the Constitution is not still a valuable and viable document in modern America because it stands in the way of thorough background checks, training courses, and its vague wording and absolute intent make it inefficient to maintain peace and order and should be amended “To the People of the United

The situation of gun control has been an issue for many years. The Second Amendment states that we as citizens have the right to bear arms and to protect ourselves. When the Constitution was first made the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution is the heart of the issue of gun control. It also 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 states declared that the Amendment was only created to allow the government to bear arms. The way it reads though is that it grants the rights of all people to bear arms. There have been cases brought before the Supreme Court that has fought the right to bear arms and used the amendment to protect their rights. The government does not have the right to take away the guns from the people but is able to control the manufacturing, sales, and possessions of guns.

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

“When Governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.” (Beck 35). This quote is from one of the greatest men in the history of the United States of America, Thomas Jefferson, the father of the Declaration of Independence, and the third President of the United States. The validity of his statement is not only historical, but as pertinent today as it was when spoken anew. It is learned in schools across the nation, although the importance of the words depends on the teacher, school, and region of the country. During the revolutionary period, King George learned this same concept the hard way, “…an armed populace is a populace that will not be pushed around.”

The second amendment of the United States 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” (Constitution). This has started a huge debate on whether or not this should be true. On one hand people believe that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" make an individual right in constitution. Under this theory the United States Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession, or at the very least, the Amendment renders prohibitory and restrictive regulation presumptively unconstitutional. Gun control is considered unconstitutional by many American citizens, as it should be. Gun control is laws or

The Ethics of Gun Control The phrase "Gun Control" means different things to different people. One bumper sticker states that "Gun Control means hitting your target." However one defines gun control, the mere mention of it brings controversy. Opposing sides have for years fought over the laws that govern firearms.

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,

One of many controversial topics in the United States is gun control. It is clearly written in the Second Amendment of the Constitution that the people will have the right to bear arms. Recently; however, people have been misusing those firearms and have been harming others with them. The government is trying to regulate the sale, distribution, and ownership of guns because of this reason. Some of the arguments being made by the politicians is simply if the government has the right to be able to control, and if it does, the effectiveness of the public policy to regulate guns.

“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

Living a life in America, we all get to have all the rights that included in the Constitution. One of those was the Second Amendment which is the rights to bear arm, the purpose was to protect ourselves from danger but nowadays a lot of people have take advantage of it and use it in the wrong way. I believe our government need to have a strict limit on guns possession.

If you have ever been in a life threatening situation with no way to defend yourself, being denied access to a firearm makes the situation worse.  Many law abiding citizens that feel threatened are not able to obtain a firearm for protection.  Innocent people are dying while criminals are getting away with gun related crimes.  There can be many regulations and laws against guns, but if a person wants a gun they will find a way to get one.  The thought of criminals having guns in their possession is a scary thought, but would you want to be the one who is unarmed?  Research shows there is no direct correlation between gun control and lower crime rates; therefore, denying law abiding citizens access to weapons for protection is unfair

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?