Time to Regulate the Grant of the Second Ammendment

“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. Throughout history, this sentence of twenty seven words has caused an intense debate. The polemic is that some people claim that a gun control policy is unconstitutional, while others disagree and even say it is necessary in order to reduce crime. Now, what does gun control mean? If it means to analyze who is responsible enough to own a gun by a “Universal Background Check”; that sounds right to everyone. But in the article “What Are Obama’s Gun Control Proposals? An Easy Guide” published in the National Journal by Matt Vasilogambros. The author states that the “gun-control

Gun control is a very controversial topic that has has a huge impact on the United States of America. One side believes that if guns were taken away as a whole, the country would see significantly less gun related crimes and death, while the other opposing side thinks that taking away guns is not only against the Second Amendment but would lead to an increase in crime and death because the government would take guns away from people who are legally registered to own and conceal guns. The ongoing debate will continue until the foreseeable future but their are plenty of reasons why more gun laws should be made. Taking away guns is not the answer, learning how to deal with gun violence is the key.

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

Gun control is a very big issue in the United States today. Many people don't agree with the gun control laws that they have today. Gun control laws only take guns away from law-abiding citizens. Many people have their own reasons for owning a gun. Why would the government want to make it harder for people to own a gun? People that own guns are not very likely to be attacked by criminals. Owning a handgun is one of the best ways of protection. The second amendment states "the right to bear arms" does this grant everyone a right to own a gun? Gun control laws have not been proven to do anything for citizens. Gun control laws just make it harder for a good guy to own a gun. Gun control laws are not a good idea.

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 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 Second Amendment to the United States Constitution is a part of the Bill of Rights that guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms. This amendment, adopted on December 15, 1791 along with the rest of the Bill of Rights was created or several reasons. One is to ensure citizens’ rights to own a firearm. This topic has become one of the most controversial topics over the last century. It has led more debates over the rising violence in society today. For example, what role firearms play in violence, how to control the sale of weapons, and how to put an end to all violence involving guns. Guns are regulated by federal, and state, legislation. There is little, if any uniformity state versus state. The major regulatory issues are child access and prevention laws, concealed weapon carry laws, regulation on private sales to minors, regulating all secondary used market sales, ownership or purchase of ‘assault” type weapons, one handgun a month law, ban on Saturday Night Specials and others of this type, preemption, and waiting periods of ownership. The key question to control is when will it be enough. How many laws are they going to make before they ban gun sales to law-abiding citizens altogether. The Second Amendment was written for specific reasons. It was not written for them to come back and add all these provisions to it. These

The term “gun control” deals with the regulation of the selling, purchasing, and using of firearms in America. The availability of firearms to the public has been causing serious debates around the country because of the diversity in the people’s cultures, judgment, and religions. Many people thought the provision set by the Second Amendment when it was ratified can perfectly be applied in the society today. However, the understanding of people about the Second Amendment and how they interpret it change over time. They cannot agree with each other about the meaning of the historical evidence (Karlan, 2013). Research and polls found that people in the rural areas tend to support the right of gun owners while those in urban areas encourage gun control. Due

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,

Guns, Guns, Guns. In today’s news Gun Control, has become a controversial topic. I have heard many people say that, “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people”. So, do we need gun control? People talk because they have mouths, they don’t know the extent about gun violence. About half of the country’s population is for / against gun control. Consistently, the media outlets are reporting shootings, that is accidental or intentional whichever way it is trending across the United States. Stronger gun control laws, mains fewer suicides. Also, stronger gun control laws, needed to protect women from domestic abusers and stalkers. Such a variety of individuals say that stricter gun control legislation is an assault on the second amendment. As we all know, the second amendment protects everyone who has a firearm. Many people should be able to protect themselves from local criminals or vicious attacks indeed, but some individuals abuse their rights. To some people gun control is an issue, and to others it is not an issue. I strongly believe in adding more laws to the gun control policy that it will reduce the crime rate. I stand strongly with being able to carry around a firearm, but stricter gun control laws should be implemented. Reasons being, if stricter laws are being put into place, we as an society can have safer communities and not have any fear for our lives as we walk down the streets.

Gun control is one of the most talked about topics in modern day America. 43 of 50 states have the right to bear arms. Most states have to background check you in order for you to purchase or sell guns. Some other states prevent carrying guns and some other ban assault rifle weapons. People who support the gun laws say that the second amendment was meant for militias and that gun restrictions have always existed. People who oppose that say that guns are needed for self-defense from people who invade houses or are actual threats. Although both of those are correct, there will always be two sides for control laws.

“It is estimated that there are 310 million non – military guns in America” (O’Brien and Stanton). Many people that own a firearm usually have more than one gun. Also, a majority of gun owners feel that owning a firearm is the best way to protect themselves at home. With the large number of guns said to be in America, there needs to be a way to prevent the number of frequently occurring mass shootings. The solution to this issue is called gun control. Gun control needs to be implied more in our society because gun related crimes are mostly committed by those diagnosed with mental illnesses, there is no contradiction with the second amendment, it has the ability to lower the amount of mass shootings in the United States, and universal

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

“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

With the rise of gun violence and school shootings, gun control has been a rising conversational piece. There are many different views on what needs to be done to stop/reduce these types of crimes. However, with these discussions come a lot of controversy, especially when it comes to the 2nd amendment. There are arguments on whether the laws on gun ownership and control need to be reshaped and strengthened. Along with these conversations comes the possibility of disregarding 2nd amendment rights. It is a very difficult topic that is taken very seriously by every party. Most perspectives agree that gun control needs to exist, it is just to what extent that is the issue. In this case, I am going to look specifically at what liberals and conservatives have to say on the issue especially because I know these are two very different perspectives with very little overlap.