Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Special interest groups in american politics
How do interest groups play a role in american politics
Special interest groups in american politics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Special interest groups in american politics
When a collection of people with common ideals and values congregate into a group for the means of political gain, they become a much greater presence than if they remained individuals. Whether through singular interest groups or through national political parties, they acquire the power to influence change in the political system, determined to see their viewpoints prevail. This practice was apparent at the time of McDonald v. Chicago. In the time period before the McDonald v. Chicago ruling, numerous people, either through interest groups or political parties, sought the influence the court’s decision and ensure that their viewpoints towards the matter of firearms predominated in the court of law. Public opinion surrounding firearms is vital to understanding why McDonald v. Chicago first originated as well as why numerous interest groups and individuals from political parties became involved in voicing their opinion on the matter. As data collected from Pew Research Center displays, in 2010, the year of the McDonald v. …show more content…
Chicago. The National Rifle Association, otherwise referred to as the NRA, was especially momentous when it came to their involvement in the case. The NRA, a political lobby in support of gun rights, was included in the petitioners of McDonald v. Chicago, having sued the city for its handgun laws (Nieto, 2011, p. 1119). On the other end of the spectrum were several organizations in support of the Chicago gun laws. This included the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence, a 501(c)(3) organization that advocates for the for the reduction of gun violence through research, submitting its opinion on the McDonald v. Chicago case to the Supreme Court, helping shape the opinions of the dissenting justices (Horwitz & Schreiber, 2010). These groups, along with countless others, offered legal and monetary support to both the petitioners and respondents of McDonald v.
(Cheeseman2013) In the National Labor Relation Board v Shop Rite Foods case some employees of Shop Rite Foods of Texas elected a worker union as a Bargaining agent for a collective bargaining agreement for over 3 months the agreement was still not settled. Then ShopRite began to notice a lot of it merchandise being damaged in the warehouse. They determined that the damage was being intentionally being caused by dissident employees as a pressure tactic to secure concessions from the company in the collective bargaining negotiations.
Facts: Rex Marshall testified that the deceased came into his store intoxicated, and started whispering things to his wife. The defendant stated that he ordered the deceased out of the store immediately, however the deceased refused to leave and started acting in an aggressive manner; by slamming his hate down on the counter. He then reached for the hammer, the defendant states he had reason to believe the deceased was going to hit him with the hammer attempting to kill him. Once the deceased reached for the hammer the defendant shot him almost immediately.
"The Controversy of Gun Control." Open Discussion about Various Controversies. N.p.. Web. 3 Dec 2013. .
Former Chief Justice of the United States (1969 – 1986), Warren E. Burger, was published in the January 14, 1990 edition of Parade Magazine for his work entitled, “The Right to Bear Arms”. In his essay, he questions the modern age standards being held for one to purchase a firearm, with an aim to tighten up those regulations. To argue his case he has provided record breaking homicide statistics from 1988 and states that some of the metropolitan centers in the U.S. “have up to 10 times the murder rate of all of Western Europe”, where strict gun control laws have been placed.
Carter, Gregg. Guns in American Society: An Encyclopedia of History, Politics, Culture, and the Law. Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, 2012. Print.
The Supreme Court exercised its interpretation of the Constitution and found that a violation of the First Amendment was apparent and therefore, also a violation of the fourteenth Amendment showing that due process of the law was not given.
The pluralistic scholar David Truman notes that “the proliferation of political interest groups [is] a natural and largely benign consequence of economic development” (Kernell 2000, 429). That is, as American economic development increases, in the form of industry, trade, and technology, factions are produced in order to protect special interests. Factions have a large platform on which to find support from various political parties, committees, subcommittees, and the courts, as well as federal, state, and local governments (Kernell 2000, 429).
One of the things that have become evident throughout the past is that gun control issues are being pushed through various conspiracy theories; for example, the shooting in Sandy Hook, Connecticut. Skeptics believe that the massacre was a joint government and media operation to create support to repeal the second amendment (Stuart, 1). Logically, this actually makes sense. Although it is easier to believe that what happened on December 14, 2012 was legitimate, it is possible that America has been duped. What better way to rally support to ban federal assault weapons than to create a scenario or situation that enables guns to kill innocent children and pull an emotional heart string on millions world-wide? Therefore, if the said tragedy was actually an ingenious plan hatched by the people who lead the country of America, then it appears to have worked in their favor. Since the shooting, Congress has pushed for sweeping reforms. In addition to Congress actively making changes due to the shooting that very well may have been conjured up by their ow...
Although my voting patterns have become somewhat more conservative in recent years, I remain in my heart of hearts a 1960s Humphrey Democrat concerned with the plight of those most vulnerable in American society-minorities, the poor, the elderly, and single women-groups whose day-to-day realities are often overlooked in our public policy debates, people whose lives too often go unnoticed by our intellectually timid chattering classes. This is happening in the public debate over the right to bear arms. For the nation’s elites, the Second Amendment has become the Rodney Dangerfield of the Bill of Rights, constantly attacked by editorial writers, police chiefs seeking scapegoats, demagoging politicians, and most recently even by Rosie O’Donnell, no less. It is threatened by opportunistic legislative efforts, even when sponsors acknowledge their proposed legislation would have little impact on crime and violence.
South University Online. (2013). POL2076: American Government: Week 4: People and Politics—Interest Groups. Retrieved from http://myeclassonline.com
...here the Court decisions supported an individuals’ right to own a firearm. In addition, when then New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin ordered the confiscation of all firearms, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. The NRA filed suit to protect individuals’ rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Nagin’s actions in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution led to the enactment of a federal law, prohibiting the confiscation of legal firearms from citizens during states of emergency. Although, NRA members are not unanimous in support of its policies, they are unanimous in support of the Second Amendment right. As long as firearms owners perceive a threat of losing the right to own firearms, the NRA will remain a viable organization. In actuality, the NRA’s membership is comprised of citizens, possessing a love of firearms, and fear of their government.
Those parties in favor of gun ownership and the freedom to use and keep weapons, rely on the fact that the facility for such rights is preserved in the constitution. In this climate of growing violence, common with chaos and crime, gun activists feel more than ever that their position is justified. As citizens of the “Land of the Free” owning a gun is an
The issue of gun control has always been a hot topic among the American public. Most everyone, if asked, will tell you that gun control is an issue needed to be dealt with because of the event that took place at Columbine High School back on April 20th, 1999. The American public has been wrestling with gun control long before then. If we take a look back at August 1st, 1966 at the University of Texas, a man armed with a hunting rifle committed one of the most violent mass murders in history. Gun control refers to the Government placing restrictions on the American public to buy, own and sell firearms. If we read the constitution, our second amendment right is the right to bear arms. This has been the ongoing controversy of this issue. We the people say our constitutional right to buy and own firearms is being seized from us. The government is using our society’s violent incidents as cover to place restrictions and bans on firearms. This essay’s purpose is to provide proof that buying and owning firearms is our legal constitutional right and that our government is trying to attack the wrong angle when trying to fight crime involving guns in the United States.
One of the many excitements in the news during the late sixties was the “Chicago Seven” Trial. People read about this crazy trial and the outlandish events that took place in the courtroom from the defendants wearing judicial robes to crude names and accusations directed towards the Judge. Who could we possibly expect to act so unruly in a place of order and justice? Why, the “Chicago Seven” of course. The events that led up to this trial all began with Democratic Convention of 1968 which took place in Chicago, Illinois.
There are few subjects in the United States of America that cause as much debate as gun control. Both sides have a lot of arguments and a lot of passion, since many violent events have broke out with guns like the Sandy Hook shooting the whole argument has became a lot more heated.