How many rights do you have? You should check, because it might not be as many as you think. Some people are not concerned that the police can execute a search warrant without knocking, set up roadblocks, and interrogate innocent citizens. Nor are they concerned when a drug dealer receives a life sentence for selling a quarter gram of cocaine for $20 (Bailey). When you combine current events with the widespread need of people to fit into society, we should all be concerned. The Bill of Rights, when written, established and protected our personal freedoms from government interference.
For centuries, governments have tried to regulate information thought to be inappropriate or offensive. Today’s technology has given the government an excuse to interfere with free speech. By claiming that radio frequencies are a limited resource, the government tells broadcasters what to say and what not to say. The FCC (Federal Communications Commission) carefully monitors news, public, and local programming for what they consider obscenity (Hyland).
As in speech, technology has provided another excuse for government intrusion in the press. The Secret Service can confiscate computers, printers, hard disks, and mail from electronic services they do not consider a press. Entire stores of books and videotapes are seized because of sexually explicit material. The Bill of Rights and the First Amendment exists to protect speech and press that is unpopular. “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression (Steele).” If unpopular ideas did not exist, we would not need the First Amendment.
The right to bear arms is so commonly challenged that it has its own name: gun control. Banning weapons not for “legitimate” sporting purposes is a misuse of the right to bear arms amendment. “If the need for defense arises, it will not be herds of deer that threaten our security, but humans (Steele).” It is an unfortunate fact that the guns we need for defense are guns that attack people not animals. The right to be secure in your home goes hand in hand with the right to bear arms. A law that went into effect in 1991 allows the tax assessor to enter your home and list your personal property for tax purposes. Being required to tell the state everything you own and submitting to an invasion by the taxman is not being secure in your home. Maybe that is why the government controls guns.
3- Family traditions can also be a good resource. In the movie, it shows that Nick and Hallie have a long-standing tradition of going camping. Annie seems eager to participate in this tradition as well. This can be a great bonding activity for the reunited family to spend quality time and get to know each other better.
In the Supreme Court case of the New York Times Co. vs. United States there is a power struggle. This struggle includes the entities of the individual freedoms against the interests of federal government. It is well known that the first amendment protects the freedom of speech, but to what extent does this freedom exist. There have been instances in which speech has been limited; Schenck vs. United States(1919) was the landmark case which instituted such limitations due to circumstances of “clear and present danger”. Many have noted that the press serves as an overseer which both apprehends and guides national agenda. However, if the federal government possessed the ability to censor the press would the government restrain itself? In the case of the Pentagon Papers the necessities of individual freedoms supersedes the scope of the national government.
Typically the most basic civil liberties are found in a country’s bill of rights and then that country passes amendments as needed in order to grow the peoples’ civil liberties, or shrink them if need be. Now, in the case of the United States the people are not “granted“ civil liberties by the...
Americans hate the word censorship. It puts fire into the eyes of any self proclaimed, speaker of the people. but is censorship that bad, or that wrong? Censorship is an enormous part of the stability of society. One of the many types of censorship takes place on the airwaves. Comedians, George Carlin, Howard Stern, and Mncow Muller had an enormous effect on the ideals of censorship in this era, trying to prove that the FCC had no right to censor radio airwaves. They questioned why words we all hear at home cannot be spoken on the radio if listeners are given a proper warning. However, there is no need for young children to be exposed to such lude material and the American people must be more reasonable about morals and stop worrying about our “First Amendment” rights.
“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” is stated in the United States Constitution as the Second Amendment. Several Americans wish to rid of guns from citizens, disobeying and disrespecting the Constitution. I shot my first gun when I was young and have always been surrounded by them. My neighbor does not leave the house without carrying one, nor does my eighteen year old friend. Never once have I felt unsafe or uneasy knowing that there was a gun close to me. The right to bare arms has become a popular local battle in which some people want to reduce the freedom of one owning firearms while others wish for the
This is called the right to bear arms and is guarantee under the U.S. Constitution. The second amendment clearly 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.” The first ten amendments are also known as the Bill of Rights. Therefore, the pro-gun activists are right. The right to bear arms like the right to free speech should be protected. However, the pro-gun activists do not the fully understand the reasons for this right. The right is for protection not from burglars but from Indians and the state. At the time the U.S. Constitution was written, many American families were living on the frontier lines where there would be a continual threat from Indians. The U.S. had a standing army but it was too far and is not readily available to protect these families when Indians would attack. This made it necessary for families to have guns in the home. The Indians were an external threat. An internal threat was the government. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote that if a government failed to protect its citizen and instead became the enemy, the citizens had the right to overthrow it. After the Revolutionary War, the Founding Fathers did not want to replace an oppressing army which was the British with one of their own. They felt that an armed citizen was the best type of army. This is what was meant by a well regulated militia. The militia would consist of every able-bodied man who was trained using their own arms for purposes of local defense and in actual military events. This local well regulated militia is the equivalent of the National Guard. In present times, we no longer have the need to protect ourselves from Indians. As for an oppressed government, we have our National Guard. The original intent of the right to bear arms does not apply to modern
Even in this modern day, your rights are not always secured. During wartime, the government can suspend Habeas Corpus, which prevents unfair arrests and punishments. Suspending Habeas Corpus is taking your rights to a fair trial, and throwing them in the trash. As you are probably assuming, the suspension of habeas corpus has been a controversial topic. You must also be asking yourself, “why take away the people's’ rights, wasn’t the United States built on the rights of citizens?”. Some people see that suspending Habeas Corpus could be useful during a war because it allows someone to quickly be prosecuted, with only the need for probable cause, while other people see it as an unnecessary check on American citizens’ rights.
“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 Constitution guarantees its citizens the right to bear arms, the idea of restricting gun ownership in order to reduce firearm-related violence would ultimately fail given the previous experiments of gun control in England and in numerous states.
Imagine enjoying a movie at Cinema 10, eating a meal at Taco Bell, or even sitting in a history class at Carman-Ainsworth High School while people all around you are carrying loaded guns! Although this may seem unbelievable, it is possible because the second amendment of the United States Constitution gives citizens the right to possess and carry guns. It is understandable that Americans would want to possess guns such as shotguns and rifles for the popular sport of hunting. However, it is ridiculous that our government would allow people to carry handguns. Handgun possession should be strictly limited, because they are made solely to kill people, they have increased the murder rate in the U.S., and they have even allowed children to easily kill other children.
The second amendment to the US Constitution shows that it is unconstitutional to have complete and total gun control. The second 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.” This means that it is the right of an American citizen, abiding by the constitution, has the right to bear arms. Currently, there are over three hundred and seven billion people residing as American citizens. Within the homes of these Americans, forty five percent have a registered gun in their household. As a diverse nation, there are many reasons why there are guns located within a household. Sixty percent stated the gun is used for protection against int...
Central in the arguments against gun control is its ability to restrict any citizen of the United States the right to own guns which is protected under the constitution. Specifically, due recognition is made to its connection to the 2nd Amendment wherein it seeks to protect the individual liberties of people. This facet also applies to gun ownership regardless of the original objective and intention. “The second amendment from the Bill of Rights grants private citizens the right to bear arms. Thus, people who stand firmly against gun control insist that no legislation, technically, should have the right to take away a citizen’s guns without first repealing the amendment in question” (Groberman 1). A good approach to consider in highlighting this part comes from depriving the citizen of his basic right on the basis of specific presumption that it would be used for violence or crim...
The second Amendment states, “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right to bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This is one of the amendments that uplifted our amazing country. The right to bear arms is an American quality that is strong to build dour nation. Why try to take this away? Gun control policies are an arising problem that the united states face. Taking away guns is not going to prevent major mass shooting, guns are needed for personal safety, and sport shooting is a major industry and community that united states citizens do for a living.
" Time for the Supreme Court to End FCC Indecency Censorship. " The Huffington Post. N.p., 11 Jan. 2012.
Head, Tom . "Radio Censorship." About.com Civil Liberties. About.com, n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2013. .
They will be sleeping closer together so the will feel like a family instead of at a resort where the probably won’t talk to each other unless they have to. If they are in a resort there is going to be activity that they are going to do on their own. If the go to a campground they are more likely to do something with you like hiking, fishing and learning about the wild. That is why you should go to a campsite instead of a