Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Concealed carry vs open carry argumentative essay
Gun violence effects in America
The gun control debate in America
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Concealed carry vs open carry argumentative essay
In the past couple of years, gun control has been a debatable topic throughout the United States, especially with the rising occurrences of mass shootings. Citizens all around are asking if firearms are necessarily a helpful tool that we need, or are they dangerous killing machines that people and news say. Today, a majority of the population respects the right to own and carry a firearm on a daily basis. Some states are changing the law from concealed carry to open carry. This means that instead of a licensed citizen hiding their firearm underneath their clothing. They would now be showing the firearm visible to everyone around them while out in public. Having the law to open-carry in every state would be beneficial not only to the owner but …show more content…
In fact, five states, California, Florida, Illinois, New York, and South Carolina think that is better to keep conceal carry over open carry. Concealed carry is different then that of open carry. Both laws let a person carry a handgun out in public around other people, but with concealed carry the user must hide the handgun underneath some form of clothing making it invisible to others. It could be placed in a multiple of places underneath a coat, vest, at the lower back, hip, leg, or on one side of the rib cage. Open carry only lets you carry the firearm on the side of your hip. Also, each person must get a license or permit showing the proper use of the firearm and pass a background check. This lets only people who are not hostile with experience of a firearm the right to carry in public. Making sure that not only is the user safe from the firearm, it makes sure that citizens around them are not in …show more content…
People will always fight about open carry and concealed carry on which is better for society. Each law has its own benefits and consequences for protecting the people of the United States. Studies about open carry has shown that by having citizens of the state carry a gun openly in public can decrease the crime rate. If the law to open carry can lower crime rate throughout a majority of states. Then why should we still have five states that deny the right to open carry. Who knows, in a couple of years we could be looking at making laws that let people carry all forms of firearms in public, not just
“The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” The Second Amendment supports conceal and carry by stating “the right to bear arms.” That statement should be exemplified as to have a gun in public. People need to have a weapon ready for use in case of emergency. Not in a car or locked up inside a house, but in reach of the certified personnel. According to the opposing side on ProCon.org, the article Should Adults Have the Right to Carry a Concealed Handgun states: “the amendment is not unlimited and should permit weapons only to citizens who can prove a ‘justifiable need’” (“Right to Carry a Concealed Handgun” 3). The article also has a women’s opinion on Conceal and carry. She stated “women need to be able to defend their home and defend themselves if they go out. It 's just a safety issue” (“Right to Carry a Concealed Handgun” 2). In order to feel safe, and have a reliable self-defense mechanism should be a justifiable reason for Conceal and Carry
Some people believe that extremely tight gun control laws will eliminate crime, but gun control laws only prevent the 'good guys' from obtaining firearms. Criminals will always have ways of getting weapons, whether it be from the black market, cross borders, or illegal street sales. New gun control laws will not stop them. Since the shootings of Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, and Sandy Hook, the frequency of mass shootings has increased greatly. Gun control is not effective as it has not been shown to actually reduce the number of gun-related crimes. Instead of considering a ban of private firearm possession, and violating individual ownership rights, it may be more practical to consider the option of partially restricting firearm access.
Very few people want to carry openly displayed guns because the police will hassle them, stores will refuse to serve them, and some people will not talk to them.
Everyone has had that time in their life where they feel that they would be safer if they had some sort of protection, concealed carry is a great option for protection. Over the years it has been growing in popularity, more and more people are going out and getting their concealed carry permit. With more and more people going out and getting their permit, some may view it as dangerous, while others feel it is a necessity. Concealed carry is essential because, it allows added protection, has certain restrictions that the person must meet, and if guns are handled properly they are not as dangerous
This essay will discuss the pros and cons of gun control. Some U.S. States have already adopted some of these gun control laws. I will be talking about the 2nd amendment, public safety, home safety, and do gun control laws really control guns. I hope after you have read this you will be more educated, and can pick your side of the gun control debate. So keep reading and find out more about the gun control laws that the federal and some state governments want to enforce on U.S. Citizens.
Is it any coincidence that the states with the loosest gun laws in America tend to contribute to the highest amount of national gun deaths and injuries? This is one of the main questions we should be asking when deciding what is best for our country and its citizens. Although gun control has been an ongoing issue, certain events like the Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook, and the Aurora, Colorado mass shootings have increased our attention to this topic. Although I believe that Americans possess the right to own a firearm, I believe there should be detailed screening and control systems to keep guns out of the wrong hands, to prevent more gun violence from happening in the future.
Although it seems straightforward, the US constitution leaves a sort of ‘grey area’ when speaking of concealed firearms in public, the second amendment speaks of militia related interest, not self-defense related interests. The second amendment defines the right to keep a firearm in a household, which was normal for the time; but the ever-changing world and constant threat of shootings means we should leave it to police officers to handle crime. One major argument, however, is the thought that ‘if everybody was armed, everybody would then be able to protect themselves’. Sadly, we do not live in a perfect world; we live in a world where more guns leads to more accidents. Also if everybody was armed, Criminals and under-the-radar insane people would all want to perform heinous acts against society. In Gun Control by Earl Kruschke he states, “Someone who keeps a gun in their house for self-defense is more likely to injure themselves than to ward off an attacker” (Kruschke 34). That means owning a gun for self-defense and recreational use is statistically not worth doing, but it may offer some much needed peace of mind. Many citizens believe that owning a gun in a home can be an effective way to defend their
“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.
Imagine enjoying a movie at Cinema 10, eating a meal at Taco Bell, or even sitting in a history class at Carman-Ainsworth High School while people all around you are carrying loaded guns! Although this may seem unbelievable, it is possible because the second amendment of the United States Constitution gives citizens the right to possess and carry guns. It is understandable that Americans would want to possess guns such as shotguns and rifles for the popular sport of hunting. However, it is ridiculous that our government would allow people to carry handguns. Handgun possession should be strictly limited, because they are made solely to kill people, they have increased the murder rate in the U.S., and they have even allowed children to easily kill other children.
Gun control has been a controversial issue for many years. A vast majority of citizens believe that if gun control is strictly enforced it would quickly reduce the threat of crime. Many innocent people feel they have the right to bear arms for protection, or even just the pleasure of hunting. Americans have a constitutional right to own hand guns and stricter laws and licensing will not affectively save lives.
In current day society, it is frequently promoted as self-defense and our “duty” as Americans to own a gun of some sort. The second amendment to the constitution declares that “We the People” are allowed to bear arms because we live in a free State. Although these statements are true, at what cost? The question, “at what cost,” arises due to the recent push for an extension and enforcement of the second amendment. The people of the States have been pushing for desired concealed carry at public areas, such as schools. Statements and questions of concern have been on the as to whether or not this idea is “smart”. Contrary of it allowing some people to feel safe, the idea should be imposed. Guns are weapons and they have the history behind them
If a person don’t carry a concealed weapon, how will they be able to protect themselves and their precious family from vicious criminals? Shall issue states are states that citizens may apply and be considered by the state for a gun permit which is also known as concealed carry. John R. Lott, is an economist and has received his Ph.D. in economics from UCLA. He claimed "shall-issue" concealed carry laws reduced murders by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7%, and robbery by 3%, according to a 2000 analysis of FBI crime data” (Lott, John R.) This refers to how concealed carry reduces crime and information was reported by the FBI compared to the other states that don’t allow concealed carry. This quote shows real evidence on how guns
According to a forum moderated by an NRA board member, concealed carriers claim that a new law is leaving them unwelcome at more private business (Mascia 2). This quote is important for the open carry issues and does signify a double entendre of the law with the barring of open carry into private businesses is affecting gun owners causing them to fret about the law backfiring.
Did you know the second amendment states that you have a right to own and use arms for protection? Kentucky passed a law in 1813 that prohibits the carrying of concealed weapons. In May 1987, Florida passed a “shall-issue” law that became a model for other states. There were 11 states that have the “may-issue” law which allowed permits. On July 8, 2011, Wisconsin became the 49th state to allow concealed carry. (ProCon.org) Adults who go through training and obtain a permit should be able to carry a concealed handgun.
... was in fact an increase in violent crime. In the data this has been shown to be false. There is also no supporting evidence to show that concealed carry permit holders are committing a significant number of crimes either. In order to get a permit in the first place background checks are done that weed out anybody that has a history of felonies, violence and dangerous mental illness. There is also great legal responsibility that comes with the territory in a self-defense situation. A normal, sane person does not want to have to use a gun in defense. There are lots of serious implications, even if the use is justified, such as civil lawsuits and the psychological impact of the defense itself.