Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Exemptions from Kennesaw Gun Ordinance
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Exemptions from Kennesaw Gun Ordinance
In 1982, the Kennesaw Gun Ordinance was created. This law required every household to own a gun. In the code of ordinance it states:
In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its in habitants, every head of the household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore. (Chapter 34- Civil Emergencies, Section 34-21).
As stated, each head of the household must own a gun so they can protect themselves. Of course there are people who are exempt from this law. The people that are exempt from this law are:
households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of household who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony. (Chapter 34-Civil Emergencies, Section 34-21).
Most people have to follow the law of having a gun in the house except for
…show more content…
people who have a mental disability or are convicted of a felony. Even people whose religion opposes having a gun are exempt from the law. In 1982, the reason the Kennesaw Gun Ordinance was passed was to protect everyone and bring the crime rating down.
The crime rating in Kennesaw went down 89% since the law was passed. It has stayed consistent for over 16 years now (Gun Ownership-It’s the Law in Kennesaw). It is these peoples right to own a gun and now it is their law in Kennesaw. The Second Amendment in the 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” (Second Amendment). The Second Amendment of the Constitution was created to help the people feel like they could defend themselves. It was given to the people just as the law of Kennesaw Gun Ordinance so they could have an opportunity to defend themselves and make everyone feel more comfortable in day-to-day
life. I completely support the Kennesaw Gun Ordinance. This law has brought crime ratings down in Kennesaw making it more possible for the cops to save more lives everyday. It gives the people more independence and not having to depend on the police to protect them. It also shows the government cares and supports the right for us to protect ourselves.
...ther for the purpose of hunting, or simpe for protection. Of course, it is mandatory to possess a license for the type of weapon that is present in the home; however, this amendment protects us from charges that might be given to those in possession of weapons in their homes.
Many Americans are now applying for a license to carry licensed concealed arms with them. The rate at which licenses are being approved is worrying. This development is concerning law enforcement authorities. Putting so many firearms at the disposal of the public is counterproductive to the gains that are being made on improving security and especially in the cities where incidences of gun crime and violence are on the rise.
Valdez, Angela and John Ferguson Jr. Gun Control: Firearms Ownership, New York: Chelsea House, 2012. 58-60. Print.
illegal for a felon to possess any firearm. ( Moore 1994 p 440) Most of the
First off, United States citizens were given the right to bear arms in the 2nd amendment of the Constitution, so many people buy firearms. For example, 40% of all US homes have at least one gun. The United States 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.” Although it is a given right, the 2nd amendment is also just a reminder to the government not to take this right away from citizens. Additionally, Wisconsin has a state preemption law that says that cities can not pass firearm ordinances that are more strict that the state laws. They can enforce a sal...
... stricter gun control, the states are moving in a different direction. The reason behind this action is that the constitutionality of tighter gun control laws is becoming a question. Once the Supreme Court of the United States answers this question on the legality of infringing on the right to bear arms we will know what our exact right is.
The 2013 gun ban legislation will not solve the problem of violence, but instead will gradually promote it. The writers of the legislation did not appropriately use the correct firearm terminology, which caused the ban to be too broad and generated confusion. In addition, the constitution guarantees its citizens the right to bear arms for self-defense against criminals and if necessary, an overextending, dictatorial government. Therefore, this recent gun ban is not helpful for the general public because the ban is too broad and removes the right we have as U.S. citizens to keep any type of firearm.
Hence, gun control is a frequently discussed controversial topic in American politics. Although the Second Amendment prevents the federal government from completely banning guns in America, limited restrictions are allowed on the distribution and possession of firearms. Certain groups of people such as criminals, the mentally unstable, and soldiers dishonorably discharged from the military are prohibited from possessing or interacting with firearms (Flynn). These restrictions are enforced by background checks in some states, on both a state and federal level. However, gun laws vary from state to state and are often not thorough enough; the background checks are flawed due to lack of information and misinformation, and guns can easily end up in the hands of criminals and malevolent individuals.
“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 right of all Americans to bear arms is a right the Founding Fathers held to equal importance as the Constitution itself. Gun control laws directly violate this right and therefore should not even be under consideration. Even if that issue is overlooked, gun control advocates state that in order to reduce firearm related violence, gun control laws must be implemented to remove the violence caused by firearms. Although this may seem reasonable, the consequences of such laws are ironically counterproductive; they exacerbate the problem instead of fixing it. Besides the fact that the American Constitution guarantees its citizens the right to bear arms, the idea of restricting gun ownership in order to reduce firearm-related violence would ultimately fail given the previous experiments of gun control in England and in numerous states.
Jacobs, James B., and Kimberly A. Potter. "Keeping Guns out of the ‘Wrong’ Hands: The Brady Law and the Limits of Regulation." The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 86.1 (1995): 93-120. Print.
The Kansas City Gun Experiment was a study that took place between 1992 and 1993. The goal of the study was to examine if increased police patrol in a “hot spot” of the city would help to reduce the amount of gun-related crime. The data collected by the research team was solely quantitative as it mainly consisted of statistics and other data numerical in nature of the increase/decrease of gun violence in these beats. After the twenty-nine week period of the study, the experiment’s findings showed that an increase in police patrol, as well as seizure of illegally carried guns, did help to eliminate gun-related crimes.
Are you willing to sit back and become a victim of violent crime or allow the government to tamper with your civil liberties? In recent years, anti-gun politicians have attempted to control guns in the name of crime prevention this is an assault on the Second Amendment rights of US citizens . The Second Amendment 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.” Not only did our Founding Fathers focus their debate on the right of people to keep and bear arms, they devoted energy to encouraging future generations to defend theses freedoms. In defense of gun ownership, Alexander Hamilton said, “If circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights and those of their fellow citizens.” During our country’s development hundreds of law-abiding citizens were able to take up arms against lawless mobs to defend themselves, their family, their homes, and their businesses. They did the job law enforcement simply could not do. Lives were saved. Robberies were prevented. Homes and businesses were defended and left intact, all thanks to the Second Amendment to our constitutional, the right to keep and bear arms.
problem a law was passed requiring the head of each household to keep a weapon in the
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.
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.