Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Definition of the 2nd amendment controversy if any sounding the amendment
What is the 2nd Amendment
Effects of gun violence in america
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Gun control
In"Get a Knife, Get a dog, but Get Rid of Gun," Molly Ivins argues on gun control laws and how guns should be banned or restricted to some people. In the essay she argues how knife is more safer than guns to use, because more likely people die from cleaning or using guns in wrong way. Author main purpose is to let people know guns is danger, and should be ban. She also points out the 2nd amendment and it says clearly that guns are for those who form part of a well-regulated militia, that is armed forced, including the National Guard. I agree with Ivins about the guns control, because guns is for special training people only, and private citizens shouldn't have gun, also we don’t need to hunt for food to survive and killing innocent animal just for fun.
Guns today are too danger to
…show more content…
none special training people to use, and can be deadly if is getting in to a wrong person hands. If a person don’t have special training to use gun he or she can hurt themselves and other people around. I have seen many people at public use guns in very dangerous ways. Many people have die because they don’t know how to properly loading the guns, and guns can create very strong recoil when firing if people don’t know how to control the recoil of the guns it can lead to serious injury. Guns is responsible for many school shootings, because so many young people today that involved in drug and many other crime. Guns is for who that is in militia or army not for private citizens to use. We don’t need guns to defend, there is many different ways to defend yourself. Family have guns in their house cause many accident death. Every day we see TV and newspapers talk about people die because of guns. Half of the victim were young people under age 20 or younger, more likely children under ten year old, because children tend to play with everything. Having guns in the house are likely increases dead, guns can cause deadly accident to family member and violence. Guns is only for those who serve to government or country. Not for people use guns for their own private life. In "Get a Knife, Get a dog, But Get Rid of Guns"Ivins say " but any fool can pick up a gun and kill with it " Guns not only cause violence in human society, also wild animal is getting hunt to extinction.
We live in the human society that animal becoming extinct, more people hunting animal just for fun like animal is just another toy to people chase around until the animal exhaust and then kill them, animal they have feeling just like humans. If we have guns control law is most likely no hunting anymore, we don’t need to hunt animal for food to survive. Many people kill animal just for their skin and fur. If humans continue killing innocent animal is will cause extinction to many animal. States with hunting law are less
Guns can only cause more violence and dead. Having a guns in the house is more likely cause accident dead to family member. Most victims die are young people and children, today young people are reckless they do everything even use guns for toy. Everyday TV and Newspaper are talk about people injury or even die from guns accident. Not only guns violence to human society, wild animal are getting hunt to extinct by hunter. People are using guns for wrong reasons, that why guns should be ban and limit to what people can
do.
Joseph Sobran argues that, “there are solid constitutional arguments against gun control. For one thing, nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government granted the right to limit an individual's right to own firearms”. He states that the government has no right to limit guns. Even though he has a point there is a limit to that statement such as serious criminals and mentally unstable people. Likewise Sharon Harris states that guns protect people against criminals, “the right to bear arms protects the individual from violent aggressors and from the ineffective protection state and federal government is offering its citizens … criminals benefit from gun control laws that make it more difficult for ordinary citizens to protect themselves.” She believes that guns keep people safe and that regulating guns will only benefit criminals. This is not true because regulations help prevent criminals from getting guns. Having less regulations is a dangerous
Gun Control in America is seen as ineffective, citizens believe gun control laws in place are not protecting lives, but taking them away. In order to solve this problem, many think more laws should be put in place. By doing so, they believe guns would no longer be in the hands of criminals and lives would not be ended before their time. In Christine Watkins’s article, “Stronger Gun Control Will Save Lives” She explains that if guns were objects that truly kept us safe, America would be the safest country in the world. She also states that a gun in any home is more likely to be mistreated, causing an accidental shooting. She also hints that more common sense laws would greatly benefit gun owners (Stronger Gun Control). One of her points is quite agreeable, more common sense gun laws would be entirely useful in the long run. By having more safety guidelines, such as; trigger locks, which make it so the gun cannot be used, keeping the ammunition and the gun separated, never pointing a gun at another person, unless your life is in life threatening danger, making sure the weapon is properly cleaned on a regular basis, and even teaching children how to properly handle weapons. By taking these common sense precautions to use, it would prevent innumerable accidental misfires in homes. On the other hand, laws put in place to simply make it more difficult to obtain a weapon is not the answer. By keeping guns out of the lawful citizen’s hands, only the lawbreakers will benefit. Author John R. Lott, Jr. wrote the book entitled More Guns Less Crimes, informs readers that by having a concealed weapon, as opposed to carrying a weapon openly, carries more potential to reduce crime rates across America. By concealing a weapon, no one knows who is ...
Gun control in the United States has been a major debate for hundreds of years. Many people believe that guns should be highly regulated while others believe that anyone should have the ability to own one. Each side has a plausible argument. Throughout this essay it will be show how not having gun control can increase violence and death rates, the right for everyone to own a gun is not guaranteed by the Second Amendment, and how over usage of guns has played a role in the diminishing populations of animals.
In “Get A Knife, Get A Dog, But Get Rid Of Guns,” Molly Ivins believes in strict gun control among citizens who are not armed forces or badged members of the society. Ivins supports the Second Amendment, but takes it literally and word for word. She believes that people can get killed easier cleaning guns than knives. The author compares gun killing to automobile killings and how you have to be licensed to drive them but we do not regulate guns. Ivins does not believe that people are using guns to hunt and put food on the table, instead they are using them for harmful reasons. She thinks that guns should be left to the people that have extensive training and discipline. Ivins’ thought is that a dog should be protection enough for everyone.
Violence has been connected with guns in today’s society. For this reason a lot of cases have ended up in courts to try to decide what the truth about the second amendment is. As the U.S. Constitution guarantees people the right to bear arms. Not only is this but there debates about this amendment, that look to strike down the law in effect. There have been laws banning the ownership of handguns, which has been an attempt to stop the violence in districts. Many are searching for the correct way to regulate dangerous or potentially dangerous weapons, by doing this they would make the ownership of them illegal (Hoxie 474). But is the...
People have questioned gun control long time. Many people wonder if anyone, aside from those who join the law force, should be allowed to carry guns. Benjamin Franklin once said, “Those who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety” (Wright 4). Franklin understood that taking guns away from law-abiding citizens would not uphold their liberty. Some people who argue for gun control state many violent crimes involve guns. Others believe a child could find the gun and something bad could happen to the child or others when a gun is unsafely stored. People who argue against gun control might say there is a huge psychological gap between citizens who shoot to protect themselves or their property and those who go into schools and shoot at others. Criminals will always find a way around gun control laws and will be able to obtain and use guns illegally. The second amendment protects gun rights for individual citizens. Reasonable gun control laws and educational steps can be taken to protect the majority of U.S. citizens. Gun control does not only take guns away from criminals, gun control also limits law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves and their families when necessary.
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.
In the United States, there is a famous saying to justify gun ownership “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” It is true that the person with the gun is the one who is doing the killing but the gun makes it easier to have a massacre. However guns are useful for police, security, and military so they could protect themselves and everyone around them. Americans are not obsessed with guns; the American people are tired that their 2nd amendment rights are being violated. Police violate the citizen right to bare arm and will detain them. The sell of guns are being banned in some states, which makes it harder for citizen to own a gun. When someone chooses to carry a knife for protection the law will try to violate his or her right.
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 problem with guns is fairly obvious: they decrease the difficulty of killing or injuring a person. In Jeffrey A. Roth's Firearms and Violence (NIJ Research in Brief, February 1994), he points out the obvious dangers. About 60 percent of all murder victims in the United States in 1989 (about 12,000 people) were killed with firearms. Firearm attacks injured another 70,000 victims, some of whom were left permanently disabled. In 1985, the cost of shootings was an estimated $14 billion nationwide for medical care, long-term disability, and premature death. In robberies and assaults, victims are far more likely to die when the perpetrator is armed with a gun than when he or she has another weapon or is unarmed.
Gun control is a really good idea. Not only does it prevent all of the above but it also prevents a lot of accidents. Accidents from innocent people and especially children. As Norman L. Lunger explains in his book Big Bang: The Loud Debate over Gun Control. He writes, “Saving Lives With Gun Control. It's a common item on the evening news: A child picks up a loaded gun and it suddenly goes off, killing the child or a bystander. In Florida, two young boys found a shotgun under a bed in their grandparents' home. A six year old pulled the trigger, and a five year old fell dead. In Illinois, two teens found a handgun in their grandmother's apartment. The gun went off in the hands of a sixteen-year-old boy, killing his fifteen-year-old cousin. In Michigan, a six-year-old boy found a handgun in a shoebox at the house where he was staying with an uncle. He took the gun to school, pulled it out of his pocket, and shot a girl in his first-grade class. She died on the way to the hospital.” (Lunger, Big Bang: The Loud Debate over Gun Control) As he shows innocent children are being killed by other innocent children just because a gun was lying around. There is no way to go around it. Innocent children killed because there is no gun control. Not convincing enough? Lunger also says, “They note that firearms take the lives of some 30,000 people in the United States each year. About six hundred of the victims are under age fifteen, and about thirty-five hundred are aged fifteen to nineteen. According to the Centers for Disease Control, a federal agency, firearms take the lives of a far greater proportion of children in the United States than in other industr...
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...
Also gun control has been proven in many ways that it does not reduce violence or crime. Gun control should be important to many people because it can help a country but in some cases it does not always help. Therefore people need to stop blaming gun control for everything and start taking into consideration that gun control is not the only factor in violence and crime. Gun control is important because it gives a citizen the right to be free and own a gun but when that citizen decides to not follow the law then he/she will have to deal with a punishment but the other citizens will have to hear about it and this will tempt governments to increase gun control laws and the more that gun control laws increase, as proven, gun related death rates will happen more and more. As you can see gun control is viewed as being a good law but others oppose and say that gun control does not reduce
Guns have been the weapon of choice for some of the most brutal massacres on America soil. Since early history guns have been used mainly for militia and defense purposes. But, the development of new gun technology has made firearms more accessible and deadly. Although the second amendment gives the right to bear arms, guns should be controlled and monitored by the government because guns have contributed to a lot of killings in America and will increase crime rates.
From the perspective of economy, ecology, and environmental conservation, hunting is very important. Hunting is necessary to protect agriculture and the environment from animal pest or overpopulation. For example, wild boars tear up many farmers land causing many problems as well with the deer population growing eating away farmer’s resources. Also with the growth of white tail deer are damaging every landscape east of the Mississippi river. Unfortunately, the harm is very overlooked, and accepted as somehow “natural”. Over the last 30 years higher dear populations have made a more negative impact due to climate change. (“Is Hunting a Good Thing?”) Hunting was legalized in 1993 to help bring overabundant wild animal populations down. The legalization