Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Civil liberties in the united states
Gun control and crime rates
The importance of civil liberties
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Civil liberties in the united states
A large percentage of the people in the world get no choice in their life, such as jobs, religion, or family. Instead they get to be safe. They don't get to choose a job, or even what clothes they wear. They just live how the government tells them, with the promise of safety. They can't protect their own homes or families, instead they rely on the government. Communist countries are this way. This one reason that safety is not more important than freedom can be defined more simply like this; Without freedom you can't protect yourself. Also, if someone tricks us into giving up our freedoms for safety, then that person becomes all powerful over us. Because our country is built on our freedoms and not our safety, we can keep ourselves safe. These are the reasons why freedom is more important than safety. …show more content…
People can't rely on the government always, because often enough they can't be there when we need them most. For example, if someone breaks into your house and holds you hostage until they steal your stuff, chances are nobody will know until the burglar is gone. But if you have a 12 Gauge shotgun in your house, then chances are they aren't going to mess with you. In states where weapon freedoms are allowed, violent crimes can be prevented more easily. According to www.mysanantoino.com On December 17 2012, in San Antonio, a man went into a movie theater to shoot people with an illegal weapon, and so an off duty sheriff pulled out her gun and shot him four times before he had the chance to seriously harm
In her essay “We should relinquish some liberty in exchange for security,” Mona Charen, a columnist and political analyst, speaks on the issue of security in the United States of America. She uses many significant techniques in her essay to persuade her readers of her argument. However, I feel that her essay fails to make a great argument because she relies heavily on assumptions, misses opportunities to appeal to pathos and ethos, and overall uses a degrading tone.
McMahan, 3) So, McMahan’s main premises come into play, either everyone has guns, including criminals, or nobody has guns. “Gun advocates prefer for both rather than neither to have them” McMahan remarks, but ultimately that will just leave the country open to more violence and tragedies. “As more private individuals acquire guns, the power of the police declines, personal security becomes a matter of self help, and the unarmed have an incentive to get guns.” (McMahan, 2) Now everyone is armed, and everyone has the ability to kill anyone in an instant, making everyone less secure. Just as all the states would be safer if nobody were to possess the nuclear weapons, our country would be safer if guns were banned from private individuals and criminals.
Our nation seems as if it is in a constant battle between freedom and safety. Freedom and security are two integral parts that keep our nation running smoothly, yet they are often seen conflicting with one another. “Tragedies such as Pearl Harbor, 9/11 and the Boston Marathon bombings may invoke feelings of patriotism and a call for unity, but the nation also becomes divided, and vulnerable populations become targets,” (Wootton 1). “After each attack a different group or population would become targets. “The attack on Pearl Harbor notoriously lead to Japanese Americans being imprisoned in internment camps, the attacks on 9/11 sparked hate crimes against those who appeared to be Muslim or Middle Eastern,” (Wootton 1). Often times people wind up taking sides, whether it be for personal freedoms or for national security, and as a nation trying to recover from these disasters we should be leaning on each other for support. Due to these past events the government has launched a series of antiterrorist measures – from ethnic profiling to going through your personal e-mail (Begley 1). Although there are times when personal freedoms are sacrificed for the safety of others, under certain circumstances the government could be doing more harm than good.
It seems as though the government has not looked at the ways that guns can provide safety. Also, how gun control laws are not working in those areas that have them. Even though guns get a bad reputation by the government and gun control supporters as being dangerous, I think that they are necessary for obvious reasons, and that gun control will not help stop those violent crimes.
The inalienable rights that he and his colleagues would lay as the foundation of fledgling nation were the lifeblood of a successful society. They had come to understand that freedom and safety didn’t exist on opposite sides of spectrum, as we are so often duplicitously lead to believe; freedom is the ultimate form of safety. What is safety? At it’s most base it is the lack of potential to harm
The idea of freedom, that America, founded its principles on, has not always successfully held up. Undoubtedly when our country first started, we had the idea in mind, that our constitution would protect the needs of its people, even as those needs alter; therefore it’s wording needed to be, ductile and interpretive. In recent years, this plasticity has become functional and fair, yet in the past, politicians used it to give and revoke, power, to and from people. Prior to the civil war, though it helped spark many of the social/civil revolution we know today, liberty and freedom were a luxury enjoyed by a few people. Woman, non-whites, and low-income people had their liberties denied, questioned or altogether abolished. However these same groups
The first reason handguns should be outlawed for ordinary citizens is because their main purpose is simply to kill other human beings. Why would our country allow us to have the right to own an object that is deadly? Our government seems to want to protect us. For example, seatbelt laws and motorcycle helmet laws were created to protect our lives. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) enforces pollution laws to keep us safe and healthy. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspects food and tests drugs to make sure American citizens are not harmed by nasty food and dangerous drugs. Yet, our government allows just about anybody to own and walk around with guns. It does not appear our government really cares about our safety. If it did, handguns would be outlawed for the general public, because their only purpose is to kill people.
Benjamin Franklin, one of the founding fathers of the United States, once said “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” In America’s society today, some are willing to sacrifice their civil liberties in order to gain protection and security over some potential threat. Especially after the events of September 11th and several attempted bombings in U.S. cities. This sacrifice of individual freedoms such as the freedom of speech, expression, the right to information, to new technologies, and so forth, for additional protection is more of a loss than a gain. Citizens of the United States deserve equal liberty and safety overall, as someone should not have to give up one value in order to gain another. This concept of individual right goes beyond the simple idea of “individual comfort.” Personal liberties cannot be surrendered and are not to be compromised since these liberties are intangible. Individuals should not have their personal liberties exchanged for national security because individuals are guaranteed protection to these rights.
Have you ever been minding your own business at the bank and soon your life was changed forever? Greeting the bank teller when a hooded man pulls out a gun. “Bang! Bang!” Horrific screaming all around you. Has Doug, (your father) ever been bleeding all over the floor begging you for help. Have you ever felt helpless starring as the hooded man while he’s shooting your father and not being able to defend yourself? No? Me neither, but it happens. Without protection, we are helpless to those with harmful intentions. America would be better off if it started training its citizens and putting guns in their hands as the Bill of Rights intended instead of putting up “No firearms aloud” signs.
Crime rate in the United States has been at an all-time high in the past few years. According to the Mass Shooting Tracker, there have been 372 mass shootings in the US in 2015, killing 475 people and wounding 1,870. According to the gun violence archive, 13,286 people were killed in the US by firearms in 2015, and 26,819 people were injured. As you can see, 2015 was a big year with gun violence in the United States and since then nothing has changed, to this day we are still seeing these statistics for death by guns in the United States. Instead of the government focusing on gun control laws, I believe that they should look at different alternatives. Some of these alternatives could be to register citizens with aggressive mental disabilities and emotional instabilities and increase research for effective treatments and cures because in most of these cases the shooters have been found to have a mental disability. We can also abolish gun-free zones apart from schools, banks, mass transit hubs, hospitals, and government buildings so that concealed carry is legal in these zones. The government can enforce stricter punishments for crimes committed with a deadly weapon and more laws protecting citizens who are forced to use a firearm in self-defense. So, in the case of a civilian using
Americans have made it clear they reject most government intrusions on their basic civil rights, including the right of gun ownership. According to an April 18, 1994 study by Penn and Schoen Associates, Inc. as many as 85 percent of American adults said they are unwilling to forfeit basic civil liberties even if it could enhance their personal safety. 75 percent agreed that police and the justice systems couldn’t protect them; people said they have to take more responsibility for safeguarding themselves. 62 percent said the need for personal guns ownership is increasing, and a majority is unwilling to accept laws that restrict gun ownership greatly.
Freedom is having the right to own, act, think, and speak without any restrictions from the outside. Ever since the New World was discovered, people have been fighting for their independence till this day. People of other colors and race have been forced to do labor without their consent. Today, those same people have been blamed or accused of crimes that were not committed by them despite of being free. Freedom has different meanings and those meanings change overtime; however sometimes the significance of freedom does not change.
Tension between freedom and security has been prevalent in America since its founding. In 1798, President Adams responded to the threat of war with France with the Sedition Act, which made opposition to the government practically illegal. During the Civil War, President Lincoln suspended the writ of Habeas Corpus to prevent disputes regarding the legality of arrests. President Roosevelt authorized Japanese internment during World War II. Clearly, our government has often felt at liberty to put personal freedoms on hold for safety and control.
“Some tourists think Amsterdam is a city of sin, but in truth it is a city of freedom. And in freedom, most people find sin.” This might sounds like a section from a travelling guide, but it also describes why we as a society cannot gain complete freedom. Complete Freedom requires all negative repercussions from individual’s actions to be unpunished, making it impossible to allow any form of justice into the community, turning it into a den of criminals. Due to that, a government with security force to help regulate rules is necessary to keep the whole country going without breaking down. However, with great power comes great responsibilities, and most government that is allowed too much power will crack under the pressure and implant complete security to protect their power from being taken by another leader that is not their main choice, or by the public through revolution. A sensible country will not allow its government to achieve either, as both will affect the country significantly in a negative spotlight. However, balancing freedom and security doesn’t take away all the problems, as having same amount of freedom and security is impossible in reality and will soon tip into either side, and having more security than freedom will make citizens protest outside and inside of the area of influence by the government, and the awareness created can lead to tragic aftermath. This is why having more freedom than security while allowing the government to regulate individual actions that can adversely affect others, as total security will lead to totalitarianism and tyranny, allowing more security over freedom will generate resentment severe riot, and, total freedom will lead to chaos and anarchy.
“Freedom.” It is a word with many different connotations, but symbolizes one central idea: Liberty. Freedom has always been deeply embedded in the history of our nation. Throughout time, many Americans have fought for freedom. From the Pilgrims, who set sail from England to the shores of Cape Cod to escape religious persecution, to the Founding Fathers of America who fought for freedom from England’s oppression, our fellow Americans have always fought for what they believed in. They gained certain freedoms that they thought would not only be important to them, but to future generations. However, it is evident that society today does not value those same freedoms.