Why America Should Not Be Banned

Did you know you are 4 times more likely to be killed with a knife or other cutting instrument than you are by a rifle or a shotgun? Gun rights and gun control are always hot items during any political discussion, whether it is between peers or politicians. One of the many great advantages to being an American is the ability to choose for one's own self what to believe in. Another advantage, in my opinion, is the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Laws should not restrict gun rights because first, it would infringe the second amendment, second, guns are a part of our culture, and finally, if guns were outlawed, citizens of the U.S. would become vulnerable.

A Federal Judge temporarily barred Trump’s Executive Order concerning the travel ban. This has caused extreme controversy among American’s as topics such as immigration, refugees, vetting, and religion all take tolls on the perspectives of the media as well as the average American. Nevertheless, the travel ban has been critiqued as well as praised by different groups and the Federal’s Judge’s emergency order has sparked debate on the constitutionality of the order.

The horrific terrorist attack on the United States that took place on September 11, 2001 significantly changed the definition of freedom in America. This event resulted in an immediate call to action by the US government to protect and defend its citizens and country. The Department of Homeland Security was created to “coordinate efforts to improve security at home, and it imposed sever limits on the civil liberties of those suspected of a connection with terrorism and, more generally, on immigrants from the Middle East.” The country was left feeling vulnerable and suspicious of things they previously took for granted. Heightened security measures around travel were put in place. Americans were asked to report suspicious activity. Muslim people were and still are subject to prejudice because of their religion being linked to the terrorist group.

The Travel Ban marks a major turning point in the policies on immigration in the United States. Due to increased terrorist attacks and illegal immigrant numbers rising, it is believed that temporarily banning immigrants from particular countries is key to ensuring safety within the United States. Though many have expressed their concern towards the ban because of its similarity to previous discriminatory and unconstitutional acts. The ban has even been referred to as the “Muslim Ban”.

Much like many white people in the South believed black protestors had no right to infiltrate their cities in the 1960s, a large number of Americans are against the idea of letting refugees or anyone that follows a strongly stereotyped religion into their country. However, like King says, “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (78). Over the course of history, the United States have established themselves as a major power with the intentions of helping others. Whether the tactics for this have actually been successful in the past is a different discussion, but if the motives are pure, then this country has a moral and ethical obligation to help those in need. In this case, that would mean allowing these refugees into the country and not continuing to stigmatize an entire group of people any further. This country turned away refugees during World War II, and a portion of them were killed in the Holocaust. The exact same thing could potentially happen if these refugees and muslims are banned from traveling into the United States.

Sixty five years after it first became law, the act still remains a cornerstone of the United States foreign affairs. In the text, it states that “whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may… suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants.” This part of the law is what has caused much controversy today. President Trump argues his right to ban muslims using this section of the law. The law is now outdated and the people that living in the country agree the law is in desperate need of a new edition. The 2017 election is not the first time Americans have called out the law. In 1965, President Johnson signed an amendment to the law and was quoted saying “for over four decades, the immigration policy of the United States has been twisted and has been distorted by the harsh injustice of the national origins quota system.” Although he argued as much as he could, Johnson never saw a change in the amendment and although he signed a law eliminating the discriminatory imbalances, the door for people in need was still not wide open. The amendment still never specifically ruled the president unable to deny someone access as Mae Ngai, an immigration historian at Columbia University said, “it doesn’t matter what the reason is,” meaning that though the

America is known for its freedom. Freedom to speak your opinion, freedom to practice any religion that you choose, and freedom to criticize the government. American’s are able to have the power or right to act, speak, or even think about almost anything they wanted to without restraint from the government or from other people. Migrants from other countries come to the United States to have a chance at freedom. To raise a family away from war torn cities or harsh governments. They come to America in hopes of getting the chance to succeed in life and express themselves without anybody critiquing them. However, America is not as free as it’s made out to be. American history has been filled with racism and discrimination against

"As a result of these differing opinions, many individuals fear they may be denied entry to the country in the future. This is especially true during times of war, as the goverment did prohibit Chinese laborers from entering the country in the 1800s and also allow Japanese-Americans to be put into internment camps during World War II. As many are now saying America is in a war against Islamic extremists, this could lead to certain groups, such as Muslims, from being banned legally," Munsey

The belief that every middle Easter is a terrorist simply because American associate their religious beliefs to be dangerous. It’s pretty clear that’s not entirely true but still even our president believe in this idea. At the Benning of Donald Trump presidency, the president declare that individuals from 8 country from the Middle East and Northern African were ban from entering the US. The Middle East and Northern African countries that are were mostly affected include Iran, Syria, Yemen and Libya. The whole idea behind this was to ensure the safety of the American citizen by stopping all individual from entering. I feel that this is unfair since the mass killings in the USA are being done by mostly white individuals or not by other minority groups. I sometime feel upset because, American war planes our dropping bomb in many of this people’s house and American simply justify it by saying that Americans are fighting terrorism but we know that we are doing for economical

The Founders of our great country considered that freedom of religion was essential for the success of our government. With the freedom of religion, it comes with the opportunity for religious diversity. This means that citizens may be able to believe whatever they desire, whether it is Christianity, Islam, Judaism, or any religion. According to Elisha Williams, once the right of religious freedom is removed it is viewed as the first domino to fall in the chain reaction. “If that falls, so will the other freedoms,” says Williams. People rely on their religion for several life choices, so the right to

But with the current scenario, people are being separated from their loved ones because they are born in a specific country! Banning young children and aging grandmothers from the six countries obviously isn’t the right move. Everyone knows that America always had strained relations with Muslim bearing countries and the ban deteriorates it even further. Notably, 97 tech companies suggest that this ban is bad for business (Reilly) Jared A Goldstein states that every president has deemed that anyone of any race, religion can become an American citizen as long as he/she upholds the Constitution (Goldstein) Based on the opposition received by the ban since day one, it is imperative that the people oppose it as much as they can.

In The New York Times’ article called “Trump’s Immigration Ban Is Illegal” published on January 27th, 2017, David J. Bier expresses his personal opinion about the execute order signed by Trump that supports to bar all permanent immigration from seven majority-Muslim countries. According to Bier, the order is illegal, since Congress outlawed all discrimination against immigrants and American citizens based on nationality, race, sex, place of birth, or place of residence by means of The Immigration and National Act of 1965. However, Bier explains that the 1965 law does not ban discrimination based on religion, which was Mr. Trump’s original proposal. The author uses examples to prove that presidents have used their powers many times to forbid

These are 3 of the amendments from the Bill of Rights and how they affect our lives today. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” This is the statement that people shall be able to pursue any religion or beliefs that they may want to. This would affect the world we live in today because this goes against many people's beliefs and interest around the world for example some forms of religions find it hard to believe that one country can believe in so many different religions. That makes them

@Billy Bauer What I am saying is that Draconian Law making is nothing short of one party rule. When a President seeks guidance how to legally ban travel of even US born and naturalized citizens it is a violation of civil rights. Likewise we could almost compare this to a hate crime as the ban is not only based on wear your from, but also on religious preference and ethnicity. As we reflect we must remember it was President Roosevelt who authorized a similar ban, deportation and incarceration by abusing his Presidential authority to issue and Executive Order in 1942 that changed the lives of many Japanese Americans.

While playing on wood playground equipment as a kid, I never wondered if the jungle gym I was crawling on could hurt me, or if taking a snack break would make me sick, or even that I should wash my hands after because there could be deadly chemicals on my hands. Neither did most people when purchasing CCA treated lumber for their residential structures. CCA, or Chromated Copper Arsenate, is a water-soluble inorganic pesticide that has been used to treat lumber for years. However, in just over the last decade, consumers have become concerned with the possible health risks that could come from direct and indirect contact with these chemicals. Even though CCA treated lumber is now banned for residential use, this lumber is still be used for other purposes and health concerns remain with existing structures. The majority of wood structures built before 2004, which are not made out of cedar or redwood, are likely made out of CCA-treated lumber. Many now face the challenge of identifying CCA treated lumber in their structures, finding a clean way to dispose of it, and replacing it with safer alternatives.