Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Introduction to the second amendment
Introduction to the second amendment
2 nd amendment
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Introduction to the second amendment
To formulate an opinion on gun laws relating to places of employment the U.S. Constitution and Indiana Constitution must first be examined. 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.” Simply proclaiming people of the U.S. have the preserved and irrevocable right to own and carry firearms to ensure safety and freedom of the people. The 14th Amendment extends these laws to the state by the “equal protection of the laws.” Written as “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” the amendment gives power to the U.S. Constitution over state when a matter of rights is concerned.
The Indiana Constitution addresses the issue in Article 1 Section 32 by asserting “The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the
…show more content…
Although I have these opinions I do believe certain businesses such as mental health facilities should have stricter guidelines as HEA 1065 addresses. I believe it should be a requirement for employees to reveal whether or not you carry a firearm. Liability is always a concern and I infer that it is one of the reasons current law restricts firearms to locked vehicles on company property. However, I believe in criminal law the one who commits a crime involving a firearm is solely
The right to bear arms is outlined in the 2nd amendment to the US constitution, and currently, the US has the highest gun ownership rates in the world - 9
In "The Effectiveness of Gun Control Laws:." the authors perform a surgical operation on the various views and issues as presented by the industry concerning gun regulation. The publication outlines the laws that have been enacted by congress concerning the regulation of firearms and shows their pros and cons. The authors suggest that there needs to be a more concerted effort by the executive as well as the judiciary so be able to enforce laws concerning firearm issuing and licensing.
Since the inception of the Brady Act, over 118 million applications for firearm transfers or permits were subject to background checks. About 2.1 million applications, or 1.8%, were denied.
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.
Frates, Chris. “The Gun Debate Isn’t Over Yet.” National Journal (2013): Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Web. 31 Oct. 2013.
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
The second amendment grants all Americans the right to bear arms. The ability to hold a firearm at any time as long as the firearm is registered. In the United states, all it takes to hold a firearm is a background check and a safety class. In a short reading from the “American Now” book a short article By Christina Tenuta called Responsible gun ownership saves lives she asks “do Americans really need guns?”, but are the guns really the problem? Although the second amendment requires some decent documents , the qualifications to obtain a firearm needs to be revised to a mental check, a family history check , and also to make it a priority for reinforcement to check on the registered firearm every six to twelve months.
State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
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 II 1791)
During the problem definition stage, one must realize that “a condition is not a social problem unless it is seen as violating certain fundamental values and beliefs about how society should operate” (Gusfield, 2011). I have determined that there exists a problem concerning gun control, more specifically, concealed carry laws, as they are inconsistent throughout the states. While 48 states now have some form of concealed carry policy in place, the Illinois does not. Thus, the citizens’ rights are in violation of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
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 II
The topic of gun control comes with a widely spilt crowd. Some people believe that gun control is essential, especially in today’s world. Some people think gun control will help with decreasing crime and making the nation a safer place for us to live. On the other hand, there are people who speak of anti-gun control. These people believe the right to bear arms would make our nation a safe place to live due to the fact that we would have protection. Do you think the Government has the right to make something illegal like the right to bear arm? In my opinion, the Government cannot simply because it will be an offence to our founding fathers, who gave us the national right to bear arm. Also, for making
When the United States Constitution adopted the Second Amendment as a part of the Bill of Rights it was to recognize citizens the right to keep and bear arms. This Second Amendment is the reason why strong gun advocates are afraid to have any gun policy put in this state. The people that have their guns believe that the government is going to be corrupted and the people have to overturn it. But, they live in a fairytale if they really thinking that they are going to beat a army like the United States. They are afraid that the local government will take away their guns. This policy that I will explain to you won't do none of these options, but instead help the state lower the crime rates that involve guns and keep law enforcement well know to people that have guns in their possession. We are trying to go after the illegal owners of firearms instead to outstanding citizen that owns gun trying to protect his family from an home invasion, protecting his herd from wolves so the farmer won't lose more money , or just having a good time hunting with his friends and family.
According to the article “Guns in the Workplace” several independent studies and the FBI crime statistics show there has never been a substantial increase in violent crime when states have enacted concealed and carry legislation. This article also goes on to say that, “violent crimes have been falling as the number of concealed carry permit holders has grown”.
Gun laws were very loose in Britain until the gun Licenses Act 1870 and the Pistols Act 1903 that served as an early model limits of gun ownerships. Later, in 1920, the Firearms Actwas passed, to stop firearms from being used by criminals and irresponsible persons. Notheless, the gun ownership laws were still vague. Howver, tragedies have shaped the legislation of this constitutional rights, making it hardert to get access to a certain type of fire arms in Britain. For instance, the Hungerford Massacre, where a young man named Michael Ryan shot and killed sixteen people and injured plenty others in 1987, shifted the legislation. This incident generated the Firearms (Amendment) Act of 1988 that banned the ownership of high-powered self-loading