The Right to Bear Arms How many of us want the U.S. government to have the right to tell us what to do, and when w can do it. There are probably not many who would agree that the government should have that right. Though having gun control laws is not to that extreme, some would say it is the first step. Growing up in a small town, and also growing up with guns my whole life I was one of those people who did not want gun control laws. Then after reading two articles that discussed this topic I found that I have been ignorant about this subject. I read the articles that discussed gun control by J. Warren Cassidy and Nan Desuka. In the first article "The Case for Firearms" by J. Warren Cassidy, the author argues that the right to …show more content…
Desuka also argues that owning a handgun is not protected under the Second Amendment " The Second Amendment may be fairly paraphrased thus : "Because an organized militia is necessary to the security of the State, the people have the right to possess weapons." But the owners of handguns are not members of a well-regulated militia" ( 424). In this essay the author is banning of some handguns. After reading each article and analyzing them, I found the Desuka essay to be a better composed essay for several reasons. The first reason the Desuka essay is more effective than Cassidy is, because Desuka tends to be more of a believable authority than does Cassidy. Cassidy at the time of the essay was the NRA'S ( National Rifle Association ) executive vise president. The NRA is the biggest advocate for the right to bear arms. In his essay, Cassidy seems to be more involved in trying to sell memberships for the NRA than trying to show why there shouldn't be any gun-control laws: "There are better ways to advance our society than to excuse criminal behavior. The NRA initiated the first hunter-safety program, which has trained millions of young hunters. We are the shooting sport's leading safety organization, with more than 26,000 certified instructors training 750,000 students, and trainers last year
The right to bear arms is a wonderful thing. The law is great for multiple reasons and should not be taken away by Obama. Reason one for the right to bear arms is to be used as self defense in case of an attack by another person. Reason two for the right to bear arms helps citizens to save their own life and live a safe life. Reason three, in order to get a gun the person must go under a background check. Reason four, people are excluded if they have a criminal act against someone. Reason five, this law does not carelessly let a person own a firearm.
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.
How about hunter where would we be without them? Can you imagine not being able to go
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.
Over the years the topic of gun control has turned out to be very polemic causing large debates, especially in the United States. A vast majority of people who are against gun control insist that is their right to own a gun mainly for self defense, while others who are for it, point out that it is not necessary to have access to certain guns like the military-style weapons therefore a ban should take place.
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right of the people to possess armaments for their own defense—this is one of the biggest conservative ideology arguments that the anti-gun control side stands by. In addition, banning handguns prevents people from an effective means of
Throughout the years there has been an ongoing debate over the Second Amendment and how it should be interpreted. The issue that is being debated is whether our government has the right to regulate guns. The answer of who has which rights lies within how one interprets the Second Amendment. With this being the case, one must also think about what circumstances the Framers were under when this Amendment was written. There are two major sides to this debate, one being the collective side, which feels that the right was given for collective purposes only. This side is in favor of having stricter gun control laws, as they feel that by having stricter laws the number of crimes that are being
The debate over gun control has been raging through the American political systems for years. On one side, there is the National Rifle Association (NRA) and 2nd Amendment-citing citizens who use their firearms for hunting and self-defense. On the other, there is Handgun Control Inc. (HCI) and followers of the Brady Campaign who want to ban guns on the basis that they are dangerous. Both sides have strong arguments, anchored in historical precedent and statistical analysis. Anti-gun control lobbyists’ arguments include the guarantee of the 2nd Amendment, the definition of “militia” as any adult male, self-defense, the relative uselessness of permits and regulations, and court cases in favor of firearm possession. Pro-gun control activists
The Second Amendment to the Constitution gave United States citizens the right to bear arms. Although, the Second Amendment stated: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms. However, the framers could not foresee the type of violence we have in our cities today. Innocent citizens have and are being brutally killed due to this amendment. Stricter gun control laws must be enacted to receive these types of weapons.
The continuing Mass Shootings in the United States has caused the gun control debate to intensify. While anti-gun control advocates say the Second Amendment guarantees each individual the right to bear arms, the pro-gun control group reads the Second Amendment as a collective right to bear arms; meaning organized militia are the only ones with that right. This essay will analyse the effectiveness of several different articles which present arguments for and against gun control.
There have also been references to second amendment that it states that the ownership of handguns rights are not protected, and that it should be easy to make a law to ban them(Roleff, 82). Another person also says that stricter laws on gun control is needed to ensure the safety and wellbeing of other citizens of the United States(Roleff, 144). Handgun control inc. also supports tough and stricter gun laws and states “waiting periods will reduce the number of criminals who obtain handguns”(Roleff, 153).
Since I was a little girl, I remember hunting season; Dad and Katlyn, my sister, would come home to say they killed a deer. Even though I did not enjoy hunting, I still see how much they love to go; hunting great bonding time for them. My dad taught my sister and me how important gun safety is. He has shown us how to carry a gun properly, never to aim it at anyone, never put our finger on the trigger until ready to shoot, and always leave the safety button on until ready to shoot as well. In my house guns are always hidden or locked up in a safe, only Dad knows the combination, so no intruder can get to them. Guns are a very serious item. I was raised to understand guns are not something to joke around about; if they are in the hands
Gun control has a history dating back to 1791, when the Second Amendment of the Constitution was ratified. However, more recently, the debate over gun control has escalated into a much more public issue to which many citizens can relate. After all, stories about incidents involving guns appear frequently today in newspapers and on television or the radio. One could say that the debate started with the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968, which banned ownership of guns by certain groups of people and regulated the sale of guns. Since then, two main groups have gradually appeared: people who oppose strict federal
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution 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 constitution is clearly saying all citizens have the right to be able to own and carry a weapon or firearm. On June 26, 2008, in District of Columbia v. Heller, the United States Supreme Court held in a 5-4 decision that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home and within federal enclaves (Cornell 1). This is showing how our founding fathers supported the right to bear arms.
The right to keep and bear arms was considered a fundamental, individual right in the original 13 colonies from the pre-Revolutionary period through the ratification of the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution in 1791. The 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 right to keep and bear arms has been a topic of extreme controversy in this century and can be argued equally from both sides. The first side says that it is our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. On the flip side, it is too dangerous and would increase the number of violent crimes. No matter which side is