Unalienable Rights In The United States

United States is a country that has problems with gun control, and this issue has many debates between whether or not people should be allowed to carry a gun on them. This free county not only for speech and religion, but also allows people to have the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment of the United States was written by our Founding Fathers,“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” (Government). The main purpose of the Second Amendment when our Founding Fathers wrote this amendment was to help the American citizens to defend themselves from the government at that time, and other countries from invading their properties. However,

The second amendment of the constitution 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.” (Cornell Law) For over fifty years, the amendment has been interpreted to the courts that people individually do not have the right to own gun, but rather that this right is to be regulated by legislatives on the federal,

The 2nd Amendment clearly states that everyone has the right to own guns and that right should not be infringed upon. Some people believe that we should take the 2nd Amendment out of the Constitution because of the recent shootings within schools across the country. We believe that it is important for people to be able to own guns and protect themselves from criminals. Even if guns were banned from being used by civilians, criminals would still be able to get them and use them in a harmful way. We believe that while guns have been used in harmful ways towards other human beings, they are necessary for the protection of citizens. A way to regulate guns would be to decide what guns specifically could be used (such as smaller handguns), who could

The Constitution was signed on September 17, 1789. The federalists declared that the Constitution granted the new government limited powers. Anti-federalists, such as George Mason, sought after a stronger confirmation from the federal government that certain rights would not be encroached upon. After just recently breaking away from Great Britain, it is understandable that the Founding Fathers feared the rise of another domineering government. Mason wrote, “A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free state.” If the government had the jurisdiction over citizen’s right to use firearms, then it could disarm them as the British had once done. This led to the creation of the Second Amendment of the US Constitution, which 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.” Fast forward to present day; our nation is currently in the core of a large controversy over gun control laws and the meaning of the Second Amendment.

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,

Unalienable Rights are rights that cannot be taken away from the people. These Rights are privileges that citizens were born with and they were very important to the Founders of the U.S. Constitution. The Founders were living under

Former U.S. President John F. Kennedy once said, “ Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty”(“John,” p.1). Indeed, throughout the course of history of United States, peoples’ liberty has been established as the most important aspect of American people. Liberty is understood as a basic right of freedom in which everyone can engage without control or interference by a government or other power. Based on that principle, Selective Incorporation is a process of constitutional law in which some provisions of the Bill of Rights are nationalized to the states through the Fourteenth

Unalienable rights are rights that are that are given and can not be surrendered. Amendment nine of the constitution states “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others

Many people are not aware of their own rights, let along the fact that there are rights for victims. Before this class, I knew of a couple rights for victims, but not very many. I was uneducated in this area. For a long period of history, victims’ rights were not recognized, because they were not seen as necessary. Now there are thirty-two states that have added an amendment to their state constitutions including the rights of victims. However, these laws are not perfect. They do not apply to all victims of all crimes, and they do not always specify at what point after the crime these laws go into affect. In fact, only about half of the country affords rights to all victims, regardless of the crime. This number is too absolutely too low, but because people in general are unaware of this, there is no movement for change.

Here in America, people have the right to protest and speak their views granted by the first Amendment in their Constitution. Reading or watching the news lately, there are a lot of protests happening. People are gathering and protesting so many different things all over the world right now and America is no different. However, what the media shows in America are arrests of protestors by security and police, both of which attack them at times, using pepper spray and other brutal methods. How is this behavior allowed? Pauline Maier sums up what the issue at hand is, “The affection with which Americans regard the three “founding documents” of the United States has not been constant over time.” (Maier pg3). American protestors are at times fighting for equal rights as equal citizens. While many others are asking for justice due to corruption in Wall Street, Banks, and American Government; however, the people who don’t hold affection for the first Amendment have been shown in the media as an increasingly violent force against those who support it. Should people be allowed to protest regardless of their cause, and without any execution of force unless provoked? I believe they should have this right and be guaranteed safety in acting on it. With these ideas in mind, America’s first Amendment is being contradicted by US government authority and private authority figures because these same people have enacted numerous assaults on people using their first amendment rights.

constitutional rights. Prison is not a fun place to be even for the most harden criminals, and a correctional system is not an arena for solving the underlying causes of crime. Some states are facing severe budget cuts due to economic struggles and drops in tax revenues; therefore, not all prison facilities in the United States could offer rehabilitation, education, mental health services, and sanitary cells for convicted offenders.

“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”. This statement is part of the Second Amendment in the United States that shows American citizens have an authority to own a gun legally to protect themselves. Since the United States was founded in 1776, this nation has grown up connected to firearms. After wars such as World War I and World War II, war industries led the United States to become one of the powerful nations in the world. Nowadays, this nation is the most influential and powerful country in the world in terms of culture, economy, society, military, and even war. It is not too much to say that today’s world is following the

John F. Kennedy once said, “ Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” Indeed throughout the course of U.S. history, people’s liberty has been emphasized as one of the most important rights of American people. Liberty is understood as a basic right of freedom to which everyone can engage in certain actions without control or interference by a government or other power. Based on that principle, selective incorporation is a process of constitutional law in which some provisions of the Bill of Rights are nationalized to the states through the nationalization of Fourteenth

Human rights are inherent to being human and essentially a right obtained by any being born in the world. These rights do not discriminate whether one was born in the United States or in Mexico. Essentially, they are what it means to be a human being, not if you are a citizen to a specific country. Lawful permanent residents of the United States prior to 1996 were eligible for public benefits programs suck as the Food Stamp Program, Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), all on terms similar to those of native-born citizens (Capps, 2002). Bill Clinton’s administration enacted Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) in which significantly

Unalienable rights are freedoms that are given to each human being and cannot be taken away unless the person that has those rights gives them up. The Bible itself does not directly talk about unalienable rights, but it does talk about human rights. Learn to do well; seek judgement, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow” (Isaiah1:17). In the Bible, it tells the people of moral laws that God gave to his people. Isaiah 1:17 is telling his people to seek knowledge, advice, and help others. He wants them to live a life of truth and free of sin. Also, it is their rights as humans to do the best they possibly can to avoid sin. In the Biblical Principles of Government and Criminal Justice presentation, the author talks about