Life in America continues to peak on the account of freedom and advancements. However, there are still some fights for freedom that are in jeopardy. The right to bear arms is a prime example, and the fight to preserve it is threatened daily. Before government took action against the unjust setup of the sexes, women were left in the shadows and rarely received equal opportunities. The fight for equality was long and difficult, but finally their voices were heard.
The debate is in constant motion when the topic of the what the second amendment really covers. Anti gun politicians strive to rip firearms from citizens and tend to use every weapon at their disposal in government. Gun owners are in a constant fight to preserve their natural God given right of self defense. The Gun Control act of 1968 was passed in favor of the anti gun views and limited the rights of gun owning citizens, it also banned the action of selling or giving of a firearm to someone outside of your state, unless you
…show more content…
The second amendment is as blunt as can be when it states, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Yet people still fight to take away the right to defend yourself... The world we live in today is a minefield of crime and being able to defend yourself and your family should never be infringed upon.
Another long fight for rights was seen with women. The rights to vote and own property were only given to a white male. This left women in the dust of suffrage. With basically only men in government, there wasn't much argument to allow women equality. The wage gap effected many lives, and hardworking women received lower wages for the same work. Schooling was also limited to women, and it took a lot of effort for women to achieve a proper
The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution 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.
Left, right, Liberal, Conservative, Democratic, Republican. There are a lot of synonyms for the sides of our nation divided. Divided on many things: religion, political views, morals, etc.. For a nation that prides ourselves on extraordinary security and unity, it is quite ironic that so many issues can cause such distress and uproar within communities. One such issue is gun control. As a white male in a middle-lower class family that has never owned a gun, I may be somewhat biased. Objectively as I can, I am going to report the facts and more importantly, try to find the core issues at play.
The way that an individual interprets the wording of the Second Amendment influences their point of view on who has the right to "keep and bear arms" (Amendment 2). The controversy brought on by the Second Amendment is because the Second Amendment does not clearly define whom "the people" are. This ambiguity has left room for action by legislative bodies and the courts to pass laws and make interpretations that influence the way this Amendment is applied and enforced. The Second Amendment says, "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." (Amendment 2).
According to www.archives.gov, the second amendment of the United States Constitution reads 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 amendment is
Everyone in the United States of America has an opinion on gun control regardless of their age, race, or religion. From within those opinions arguments are formed. People are arguing about gun control at their jobs, at their schools, and sometimes at their places of worship. On one side of things there are the people that support gun control like certain politicians or political organizations, teachers, police officers, and so on. On the other side of things there are the people that are against gun control, people such as hunters and various types of criminals. When it comes down to sensitive topics like gun control, there are very few people that do not choose a side. The Second Amendment, like all Amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights, is not absolute. There are vague legal boundaries that have been set down thus far which answers some questions, but leave many more open (Sanders).
Today the Second Amendment is in the media more and more due to the recent up rise in crimes with firearms. Every person seems to have an opinion on whether our Second Amendment should be removed or it should not ever be touched. “A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunitions to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include the government.” (George Washington) The Second Amendment of the constitution reads "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." Today the actual meaning of the second amendment is still not fully clear. If you were to ask multiple people the definition of the second amendment, you would receive a different one from each person. Also, you would be able to determine whether they are pro or anti-gun
The 2nd Amendment has been a very controversial topic over the past year with the recent open carry law introduced to the public. This has caused much confusion amongst the right to bear arms and the overlooking Federal government’s role in controlling what it seems dangerous to the public. Our first eight amendments of the Constitution are direct restrictions on the federal government, and the 2nd amendment does not specifically grant the right for people to bear arms in a sense most would have believed. It does however forbid the federal government from infringing on your unalienable rights to defend yourself, it specifically says you shall not be infringed. This targets Congress, the Judicial and Executive branches of government and means they cannot pass a law, or sign anything that infringes on your right to bear arms or defend yourself.
Throughout the years there has been an ongoing debate over the Second Amendment and how it should be interpreted. The issue that is being debated is whether our government has the right to regulate guns. The answer of who has which rights lies within how one interprets the Second Amendment. With this being the case, one must also think about what circumstances the Framers were under when this Amendment was written. There are two major sides to this debate, one being the collective side, which feels that the right was given for collective purposes only. This side is in favor of having stricter gun control laws, as they feel that by having stricter laws the number of crimes that are being committed with guns will be reduced and thus save lives. However while gun control laws may decrease criminals’ access to guns, the same laws restricts gun owning citizens who abide by the law; these citizens make up a great majority of the opposing side of this argument. These people argue that the law was made with the individual citizens in mind. This group believes that the Amendment should be interpreted to guarantee citizens free access to firearms. One major group that is in strong opposition of stricter gun control laws is the National Rifle Association (NRA). The NRA argues that having stricter gun control laws will only hinder law-abiding citizens. The final outcome on this debate will mainly depend on how this Amendment is going to be interpreted.
People believe the second amendment gives them the right to own as many guns as they want because they are a United States citizen. The second amendment, which says “the right to bear arms shall not be infringed”, begins with “a well-regulated militia”. This does not give an individual the right to own guns because they want to but for the safety of our country. The Constitution, written in 1787, helped the United States get soldiers in a time when we needed an army. It is now 2016 and we have an army to keep us protected from various threats. Michael Waldman, President of the Brennan Center of Justice, states there is “nothing about an individual right to bear arms”. Law arguments from 1888 to 1959 about the second amendment also states “an individual right was not guaranteed”
Gun violence in America is a public health crisis, which needs to be recognized and changed by legislatures, and the voting American. As conscious Americans, we need to vote for changes to gun laws that would improve background checks nation-wide, make firearm registration mandatory, restrict the sale of assault weapons and weapon modifications that give the shooter military-grade fire power, and invest in gun-safe technology and safe firearms storage designs. This type of technology will help prevent criminally oriented people from accessing guns, and will help prevent the accidental deaths of many children by guns. This essay will explain the reforms needed to help ensure Americans can still exercise their 2nd amendment right of owning firearms, and preventing the unnecessary deaths of many Americans at the same time.
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 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.
Gun control is an awfully big issue in the United States today. Many people in America don’t agree with the gun control laws that they have today. Gun control laws only take guns and freedom away from law-abiding citizens. Many citizens have their own reasons for owning a gun. Why would the government want to make it harder for people to own a gun? People that own guns aren’t very likely to be attacked by criminals. Owning a handgun is one of the best ways of protection when used correctly. The second amendment states “the right to bear arms”; does this grant everyone the right to own a gun? Gun control laws have not been proven to do anything for citizens. Gun control laws just make it harder for the good guy average Joe to own a gun. Gun control laws are not a good idea, and are taking part in the loss of our freedom that was given to us.
Our invasive government is second to none in New York State on our economic system? The economic system of today is broken; our state needs to believe in their citizens. Our state isn’t doing that, it has there foot on our throats and we are desperate for air. The state isn’t ours any more; the governor of our state isn’t listening to our protests.
Listverse,. '10 Arguments For Gun Control - Listverse '. N.p., 2014. Web. 30 Oct. 2014.