More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on the second amendment gun control
Essays on the second amendment gun control
Problem analysis on gun control
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays on the second amendment gun control
Does the Supreme Court have the right to prohibit felons from owning firearms and if so why? This is the theses statement for this paper bring up the question does the second amendment protect felons and their right to bear arms even though they have been charged of a felony doing with or without prior weapon charges? First a felony charge is typically invoked by violence generally more severe then a misdemeanor resulting in one or more years in prison also can incorporate the death penalty, but that is irrelevant a dead person cannot use a gun. So the main focal point for the Supreme Court is the idea that most felonies are related to violent crimes.
Lewis V. United States 1980, Lewis was charged with a felony during 1961 in Florida after breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor. He then proceeded to serve a term of imprisonment were is felony was never overturned or returned back to court. In 1977 George Calvin Lewis was then arrested once again in Virginia for the possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U. S. C. App. ｧ 1202. Lewis took up the defense that ...
A very controversial court case in American history was Texas vs. Johnson (1984). In 1984, a man named Gregory Lee Johnson followed a group of anti – Reagan protesters to oppose the American exploitation of third world countries. This act of rebellion resulted in the burning of the American flag. Out of a total of approximately one hundred demonstrators who were involved in this ordeal, Johnson was solely charged with a crime. Johnson was arrested under Texas law, which made the burning of the United States or Texas flags crimes. Johnson was convicted and sentenced to one year in jail and fined two thousand dollars for his crime in restitution. Texas reasoned that the police were preventing the breach of peace; consider the flag a symbol of national unity. At Johnson's court trial, he was convicted of aiding, abetting and encouraging the burning of the Texan flag. This, in turn, made Johnson guilty under Texas state law.
...ry weapons when in actuality it is only allowing members of the military to have weapons. This way of seeing the 2nd amendment was upheld in the Supreme Court in 1939 when the courts ruled that the 2nd amendment only guarantees the right to bear arms in the context of a state’s ability to form a militia.
LAWRENCE V. TEXAS. 478 U. S. 186 :: Volume 478 :: 1986 :: Full Text." US Supreme Court Cases from Justia & Oyez. .
Violence and crimes are growing in number and affecting American society. By reinforcing background checks we could reduce crimes and limit easy gun access to mentally ill people. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is a database where the names of people that have committed a misdemeanor, are mentally ill or drug abusers is kept to prevent them from attaining guns. Most criminals buy guns from unlicensed sellers at gun shows that don’t do properly background checks through the NICS, making it easier from criminals to purchase firearms. Another problem is missing records or information that was not reported to the background check system. Better background checks could reduce crime and gun violence in America.
Heller,” the United States Supreme Court revealed what the Second Amendment is really about. In June 2008, a S.W.A.T. officer with the Washington, D.C., Police Department sued in the District of Columbia District Court for the right to carry a handgun while off duty. The Supreme Court ruled that he had the right to carry a weapon for a lawful purpose, and the District Court's opinion was reversed from the decision in 1939 when the Second Amendment was last interpreted. It also ruled that two District of Columbia laws, one that banned handguns and the other one that required firearms kept in the home to be disassembled or trigger-locked, violated the Second Amendment
Now, before anyone thinks that I do/don’t advocate certain persons with felonies or mental incapacities having fire-arms, please allow me to put this into perspective: This is about the Framers’ intent regarding the Second Amendment. These other aspects of certain persons being barred create assent/dissent on their own merits of constitutionality. I do not wish to get caught in a debate about those aspects. I maintain my own opinions inre this aspect of the Second Amendment. I will say this: Not all crimes are identical, even though they may be coded alike. Mental illness is a medical issue, and can be treated effectively, to my understanding. Given this exhaustive retinue of discussion, I have concluded that I believe that these individuals should have this fundamental right examined closely for individual exercise based each on their own merit, by full examination, then a decision rendered, based upon such evidence gathered, whether they should have the right re-instated, or not. Some states have this as their venue for such persons, via codified statute, to request of the court to give finding. That is all I will state inre this aspect. Please respect my privacy of opinion to this degree. I shall extend the same courtesy to all.
This case was brought to the Supreme Court with Plessey’s argument being that his 13th and 14th Amendments was being violated. But Louisiana argued that the 14th Amendment states that everyone is to be treated equally and that is exactly what happened. They said that the cars were separate but equal and that abided by the Constitution while keeping the Jim Crow laws. The Supreme Court decided that no law was violated and took the state’s side. The Court upheld Plessey’s conviction, and ruled that the 14th Amendment guarantees the right to “equal facilities,” not the “same facilities.” In this ruling, the Supreme Court created the principle of “separate but equal,”(“Judicial Review”,
The case was heard by the Seventh District Court of Appeals and ultimately appeared before the United States Supreme Court, where Justice Scalia delivered the final verdict in favor of the plaintiffs. The Lewis v. City of Chicago case was filled because the City of Chicago, Illinois, offered a firefighter candidate exam, in which over 26,000 persons applied (Grossman, 2010). The city issued a public announcement following the exam that only candidates who received a minimum score of 89 or above on the test would be considered as well qualified and selected from a lottery pool to continue on in the hiring process for positions with the Chicago Fire Department (Grossman, 2010). Candidates who scored below a 65 were notified that they had failed the exam and would no longer be considered for a position with the fire department.... ... middle of paper ...
Gun control is a major issue in today’s society. Every day on the news guns have taking somebodies life or injured them. 12,664 U.S. homicide victims, 8,583 were killed by firearms; and of those, 323 were known to have been killed with rifles. Handguns accounted for 6,220 murders, and the rest were from shotguns, undefined other guns or unknown types of firearms (Crain's Detroit Business). The four articles I chose are about gun control and rather it should be considered or to be left alone.
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.
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)
Frates, Chris. “The Gun Debate Isn’t Over Yet.” National Journal (2013): Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Web. 31 Oct. 2013.
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.
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 government is attempting to reduce violent crime by controlling the amount of guns on the market, who is allowed to purchase a gun, and what type of gun a person is allowed to purchase. The only people affected by gun control laws are the law-abiding citizen that should be allowed to purchase firearms without the government’s interjection.
Heart of Atlanta v. U.S. and Katzenbach v. McClung. 2003. The Supreme Court Historical Society. 22 April 2003.