President Barack Obama says we have an “obligation” to try anything that could save one child, but many people find this statement to be ridiculous. Gun control is thought of as a government policy or regulations to control or limit the sale and use of firearms. In the U.S. constitution, the 2nd Amendment 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. Inside America today, gun control is a major issue, especially in the political arena. People debate on the daily that not all things in society make it a safer place to live. The best intentions of America’s lawmakers often do not achieve the desired outcome; therefore, the nation …show more content…
Some people think if they have a gun in their house, they will have a way of protecting themselves in case of an emergency, but while others who are against it believe it is a danger. For example, the gun could end up in the wrong hands, such as a young child. The Constitution of the United States of America is the supreme law of the United States that governs the nation giving America the rights and freedom. In a different context, Professor Amar’s discussion of whether the right to keep and bear arms should be considered a “privilege or immunity” focuses on the Blackstonian notion of the rights of the individual. Liberties held at common law that fell within this concept of individual right constituted privileges or immunities. According to Blackstone, “personal security, personal liberty, and personal property” were the individual rights. Blackstone considered the right of self-preservation to be essential to individual liberty and, as such, the ultimate right. The individual right to “have arms” was essential to protect these rights (Blackman and Shapiro 79). The constitution gave people the right to own a gun, but others believe that we should not have that right. The American constitution quotes, “The Glucksberg test recognizes the right to keep arms for defense of person and property as a privilege or immunity
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
“Gun control means control. It means control for the government and the government starts controlling the people.”(Luke Scott) I believe this quote is accurate because the more the government tries to make gun control less of a problem the more of our second amendment right is being taken away. There are number of ways that a criminal can obtain a gun, legally or illegally, but an honest citizen will go through through the legal process. Taking our 2nd amendment will only make the people vulnerable to government power.
Should the mere fact that criminals committing crimes with the use of guns infringe the national right of the innocent to possess guns. This is a question that arouses everywhere and no matter which way it is viewed the controversy will always go on. "A gun is a mere tool that can be used for good or evil. Our country is based on the belief that man is good until he or she is proven to be otherwise."(Harris p.2) This means that only a few people are committing crimes with uses of guns and why completely remove them from society. Therefore, we should strenuously protect the rights of free men and likewise prosecute and punish the criminals who abuse the rights of others. The problem with gun violence is associated with the child's
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 the right to bear arms according to the Second Amendment has been a hotly contested issue for many years in American history. The matter has been one of the most controversial issues in the second half of the twentieth century and into the twenty-first; disputed between politicians on the liberal and conservative side along with issues such as abortion, capital punishment, and gay marriage. The Supreme Court has officially defined the controversial Second Amendment by stating that states have the right to maintain a militia separate from a federally controlled army (Gale Encyclopedia, pg. 155-162). However, “Courts have consistently held that the state and federal governments may lawfully regulate the sale, transfer,
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 world is a dangerous place to live. Every day, we wake up, send our children off to school and spend most of our lives working. We put ourselves in harm’s way every time we leave our homes. At any moment, we could be killed in an automobile accident, plane crash, gunshot wound or any other random occurrence that happens in this crazy world we live in. There have been so many advancements in technology and medicine to protect ourselves from these lucks of the draw events that life throws at us, but some people seem to have a problem with gun ownership. Gun ownership for many is viewed like the seatbelt of a car or the vaccine given to us to prevent the Flu, it is a form of protection and security. Some people in our country would argue that there needs to be a banning of fire arms or more restrictions to keep fire arms out of people’s hands. I disagree with this idea. I feel that Federal and State governments should not bad firearms or make the purchasing process more difficult. It is every legal citizen right to bear arms, whether it is for protection or sport.
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.
The Gun Control issue has sparked major controversy in America today. People who support gun control feel that guns are the reason for the soaring crime rate in our country. I disagree with the supporters of gun control. I feel that because of the black market, violent criminals being released from prison early, and the need to ensure personal safety, stricter gun control will have very little impact on violent crime in America.
Usually when people think about guns they think about crime. But are the two really related? Do guns really lead to crime? And if they do, do laws that restrict firearm ownership and the use of guns stop the crime or protect people? These are the questions many politicians are asking themselves when creating gun control laws. The debate over gun control is nothing new. As you can see this debate still goes on today and is the cause for the beginning of gun control laws.
their writing, do we blame the pencil they use to write? Highly unlikely. Gun control
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.
Guns have been around for a very long time. People love being able to have the freedom to do what they want, especially when they can possess something that make them feel superior. The introduction of the Second Amendment opens up the controversial, yet well anticipated opportunity for United State citizens to be able to own guns. Americans enjoy the benefit of being able to own guns for decades over people in other countries. People can buy guns and carry them around in public. They own guns for many reasons such as to hunt, to protect themselves, and simply to satisfy their desire of owning a gun, but in recent years, the issue of people carry guns has become a problem. There are so many people get killed by guns in different parts of
"I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it."
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.