Background
The world's first weapon in history was the fire lance, known as the gun machine. In 1364, Richard Gatling invented “the first successful rapid-fire firearm,” which is called the Gatling Gun. Gatling brought about the idea of self-defense through the use of guns.
Gun ownership plays a huge role in history and the modern world. This mechanism became an idea of evolution rather than revolution, which means that it was negatively adaptable thus resulting a negative impact.
In 1791, the United States adopted a new rule within the Constitution, which became known as the Second Amendment. The idea of the Second Amendment granted citizens the right to defend themselves through an assault weapon, such as, the gun. “The Second Amendment
…show more content…
This marks the first time ever that the Pew Research Center gained more support for gun ownership than gun control. Fifty-two percent represents more than half of the nation’s population, which is tremendously high and affective. Furthermore, this detail clearly demonstrates that not only politicians have contributed in slowing down the process of gun control but rather the nation’s own citizens.
It is evident to conclude that, no one, specifically a politician, has ever demonstrated vast efforts into this issue. As a result, the world suffers immensely because of it: United States, France, Iraq, Beirut, among other countries. Therefore, the issue of gun control requires an absolute demand of support, negotiation, and most importantly, a law to be passed down. If there is no progress to be made towards achieving this goal, then the country will continuously suffer for the wait. Moreover, this demonstrates that the longer we wait the worst the progress of achieving harmony and unity among citizens becomes.
The
…show more content…
For example, in the case of Bryan vs. United States, 1998, “the court affirms the 2nd circuit ruling, which essentially equates the state of mind ‘wilfully’ with ‘knowingly’ in the Gun Control Act, even though both terms were used, and wilfully traditionally means a greater state of mind (awareness of what you are doing, whether it you it on purpose, versus whether you know you are violating the law in question) than knowingly. Justice Stevens, who believes gun owners are evil, decides that all the government need show is that the defendant knew he was violating any law, and not the specific requirement the defendant is being charged with. The addition of states of mind was a reform in the 1986 FOPA, before that ATF regularly got convictions against persons who had no idea they were doing anything wrong at all, and in fact thought they were just selling off their gun collection. This in essence repeals part of that reform, by judicial decision.” The federal court ruled against the case, preventing Bryan the right to bear arm through the use of an assault weapon. This detail is significant because it shows the progress towards achieving the goal of controlling gun
Each person has a different view on the world. If a person is asked about their view on a certain subject, they will likely show support or disdain for the subject. For example, some people believe abortion is morally wrong. Others view abortion as the mother’s choice since she is carrying the child. On the issue of gun control, people are usually either for or against stricter gun laws. Why do people view the world in the way they do? How do people decide what stance to take on an issue? To answer these questions, sociologists look at the sociological perspective which “stresses the social contexts in which people live” and “examines how these contexts influence people’s lives” (Henslin, 2013, p. 4). Furthermore, the sociological perspective
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 growing violence, rife with turmoil and crime, gun advocates feel more than ever that their position is justified. As citizens of the “Land of the Free” possessing a gun is a fundamental right, and may even be a necessity... Anti- gun lobbyists point to the same growing violence and gun related crimes in an effort to call on the government to take action. By enacting more laws and stricter control, these people not in favor of guns feel society would be better safer.
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.” This statement basically means that people should be able to own guns for their own security and that right should not be taken away. The Second Amendment was added to the Constitution because the creators of the Constitution wanted to make sure that it protected basic rights, including the right to bear arms. It was also added to the Constitution because shortly after it was ratified, James Madison wanted to give more power to the state militia and to give more power to the people to give them the ability to fight back against the Federalists and the tyrannical government they were creating. After fighting off the British, the Second Amendment was created to give citizens the opportunity to fight back against controlling government and protect themselves with their own weapons.
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to
”(Gopinak, 2007, p. 458 ). This demonstrates that United States is just not inclined to take any action on gun control which is leading to deaths of children and adults. Some individuals believe handguns are not needed in American 's society. Then those who oppose gun control argue guns are a necessity to: hunting in the wild, self-defense, and it is part of the American culture. Furthermore, gun violence is having a vast impact on loved ones; losing a family member can have enormous affect socially, physical and mentally.
There are gun control laws to try and reduce the number of violent shootings that occur. They are trying to put limits on weapons that Americans can own. The government is trying to take our guns away mainly because of people that are criminally insane. Most of the people who commit crimes don’t even have the weapons legally. If the government takes away the rights of people who are allowed to have firearms in their possession, it will most definitely cause an outrage. Most people believe that the people should be more capable of maintain proper use of the firearms instead of having them all taken away. Taking the firearms from Americans away would cause a lot more problems than there actually are. The people will be upset with the government taking firearms away because of the horrible people who harm innocent people using them. So they will do anything to their capabilities to keep them.
Gun control is one of the most debatable topics today. Thirty-three million Americans own firearms for hunting (Aitkens 9). But hunting is not the sole reason for which many individuals buy firearms. Of all countries, the United States is the one which is troubled most by a large number of criminals who are in possession of guns. The U.S. has the highest firearm murder rate of any democracy in the world (Aitkens 5). Where is the country going wrong as far as gun control is concerned? An immense number of laws have been created by the legislature. All were made in order to be sure guns remain in control of the right hands, yet the problems seem to prevail. All three branches of government (judicial, legislative, and executive) are involved in desperate attempts to improve the situation. Getting rid of guns would not work; it would be an impossible task. But, if pressure was applied to all aspects of gun employment - production, ownership, and most importantly dealership - a majority of problems could be controlled.
According to “Capital Punishment, Gun Ownership, and “Homicide”, it is attempting to answer “two controversial questions, both related to the problem of interpersonal violence in America.” One of the questions asks if “the use of the death penalty exert any measurable influence on the rate of homicide in the U.S.?” and the other asks “what relationship, if any, exists between the level of gun ownership and the level of homicidal violence?” (G. Kleck, 1979)
There is an American consensus for some form of gun control. “…[F]irearms were involved in two-thirds of all murders in the United States and [t]he United States leads the world's richest nations in gun deaths…murders, suicides, and accidental deaths due to guns - according to a study published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the International Journal of Epidemiology” (Lepore). There might be some far extreme people who think that all guns should be banned but most sane Americans do not think that gun rights should be abolished. Americans regard self-defense as the most compelling reason to have a gun and twenty-two percent of households have handguns in the United States. However many people do think that gun control laws must be enacted and enforced. Pro-gun extremists and the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) must understand that there is a real for many people at the uncontrolled s...
The second amendment states “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The Founding Fathers included this in the Bill of Rights because they feared the Federal Government might oppress the population if the people did not have the means to defend themselves as a nation or individuals.
The debate over gun control in America has constantly been brought up over the years due to gunmen killing large amounts of people in shootings. From Columbine to Sandy Hook, or the shootings of the two reporters in West Virginia, these public shootings are occurring everywhere. Lawmakers and civilians alike are pushing for increased gun control in hopes of preventing the same tragedies. Anyone that has been affected by the shootings has been pushing Congress and state governments to force new sanctions on the government. Over the past three years, Congress has shot down all the laws despite the large amounts of public support.
Every day some news related to gun violence are being heard all over the world. Shooting in driveway, public places, schools, homicide and suicide are some of different types of gun violence. Shooting on people and killing them is a big issue in the world and different comments are provided about that. One of the most important of them is about gun control laws. Stingl (2013) says “The term gun control as it is used in the United States refers to any action taken by the federal government or by state or local governments to regulate, through legislation, the sale, purchase, safety, and use of handguns and other types of firearms by individual citizens.” According to this idea gun control laws should be stricter and people should not be able to have access to guns easily. However, there are many other people who believe this idea is not a good solution and never help. This essay will demonstrate for and against views about the topic. People who agree with this idea consider: firstly, stricter laws will reduce violence and gun control means crime control. Secondly, some research shows people with gun are more at risks of getting shot. Thirdly, guns can always be misused by their owners and finally, stricter law is the best and the faster way to control crime and make community safe. While opponents say first of all, guns are necessary for people safety and protection. Secondly, guns are not the only tools for killing and violence; there are other weapons too and finally, gun ownership is human rights.
The Second Amendment of the United States protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms. It was adopted on December 15, 1791 along with the rest of the Bill of Rights. The United States Government should not infringe on those rights by the enforcement of gun control against law-abiding citizens. Gun control does not reduce crime, does not stop criminals from obtaining guns, and does not address the real issue of violent crime. There is no evidence that gun control affects the crime rate.
The United States today can be a scary place. Someone that is disgruntled, has a mental health issue, radicalized through terrorist propaganda or for any other reason can take up a firearm and mass murder innocent people. It can happen anywhere, anytime, anyplace. Anyone that pays attention to any news or newspapers has probably heard something about gun control. It’s a hot topic in this country and around the world. There are a lot of problems with gun control and regulating guns in the United States. Before you can talk about solutions you need to isolate the problems keeping the solutions from being realized. The people who are for and against guns do have common solutions but there is strong opposition
There are three ways to approach gun-control: first, it is the citizens’ constitutional right to own firearms; second, firearms kill - get rid of them; and third, to have no opinion and not deal with the issue. Whichever view people have on gun-control, they must first understand the facts and statistics of these issues. Charlton Heston’s “Is Freedom Lost on the Next Generation?” and Paul Craig Robert’s “Unarmed and Unsafe” both study the opposing side of gun-control with facts and logic.