Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Solutions to citizens gun rights
Guns in the world essay
Guns in the world essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Solutions to citizens gun rights
Gun control
In the Article”Should more gun control laws be Enacted?” Found on Procon.org the artical states. Gun control laws are used to enforce gun safety, but if they enforce gun control too much they risk the criminals to be the only ones with guns. Gun control in the nation is enforced more than other laws in the nation. Most gun control laws affect the law abiding citizens,but some make it harder for criminals to obtain them. While the nation tries to remove the guns from homes and businesses the 2nd amendment protect their right to keep and bear arms. More Gun control laws should not be implemented in the U.S.
In the Constitution of the United States of America there are a set of rights implemented for the people to ensure their rights
are protected one of them is the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd amendment protects individual gun ownership to maintain Liberty and the security of the nation. It also states they have the right to “maintain a standing militia and the right to keep and Bear arms .”It also states”The right to bear arms so no be infringed.” The article say the Gun control laws will not prevent criminals to obtain guns Illegally. Gun control laws aim to deter Criminals from obtaining guns but most guns used by criminals are obtained Illegally. Police in Chicago that had strict gun control laws and they found guns from Illinois and other states. Gun control laws affect law abiding citizens more than the criminals who ignore the law.”If guns are outlawed, only the outlaws will have guns” says journalist John Stossel. Some people say “More gun control laws would reduce gun deaths” but that is not true. Guns don't kill people it’s the User of the gun that kills people. In a study of a town that had strict concealed carry law saw the rate of murders went up. When gun ownership doubled in the 20th century, the rate of murder went down. Gun control laws help the criminals more than the citizens who follow the laws. More gun control laws should not be implemented in the U.S. We have made some important facts that more gun control laws would help the criminal then help the citizens. The most important one was the 2nd amendment saying our right to have guns should not be infringed because it is used to maintain liberty and security in the U.S. If we don’t do something about this how will we protect ourself.
After the American Revolution, America had earned it’s freedom from Britain. In order to govern this new country the Articles of Confederation was created. This document was flawed by the colonists fear of putting too much power into a central government. Knowing the document needed to be fixed a constitutional convention was called. The document created at this convention has been our constitution ever since. But even the Constitution was meet with criticism. One major concern when writing the constitution was how to protect the citizens rights. The Constitution did this through the preamble, the legislative process, the limit of presidential terms, the judicial branch, and the bill of rights.
Typically the most basic civil liberties are found in a country’s bill of rights and then that country passes amendments as needed in order to grow the peoples’ civil liberties, or shrink them if need be. Now, in the case of the United States the people are not “granted“ civil liberties by the...
The Founding Fathers deemed the rights of the individual to be of utmost importance and enumerated specific protections of them in the Bill of Rights. Works Cited The "General Will." Wikipedia. The World of the. Wikimedia Foundation, 20 Dec. 2013.
The United States being the leader in per-capita gun deaths among industrialized nations, massive shooting such as Columbine, Sandy Hook, and Virginia Tech, and an average of 33 people dying in the United States everyday due to gun related violence are all reasons that we not only should, but need to regulate gun laws.
Joseph Sobran argues that, “there are solid constitutional arguments against gun control. For one thing, nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government granted the right to limit an individual's right to own firearms”. He states that the government has no right to limit guns. Even though he has a point there is a limit to that statement such as serious criminals and mentally unstable people. Likewise Sharon Harris states that guns protect people against criminals, “the right to bear arms protects the individual from violent aggressors and from the ineffective protection state and federal government is offering its citizens … criminals benefit from gun control laws that make it more difficult for ordinary citizens to protect themselves.” She believes that guns keep people safe and that regulating guns will only benefit criminals. This is not true because regulations help prevent criminals from getting guns. Having less regulations is a dangerous
these rights in the Bill of Rights. The people agreed with them. The constitution outlined
Two hundred and twenty five years ago, a document was added to our constitution granting us five ideals. This document was called the Bill of Rights, which granted us the basic rights of opportunity, liberty, equality, democracy and rights. Since the Bill of Rights was added, not all of the ideals have been obeyed consistently. Liberty, rights, and democracy have been followed well throughout the years, but opportunity and equality have fluctuated. Although the constitution and bill of rights says every american should be granted with these ideals, some americans simply did not make that so.
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.
- These rights are natural rights, petitions, bills of rights, declarations of the rights of man etc.
“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.
This also states that gun violence would be reduced and restrictions have already existed. It also states that the majority of Americans, including gun owners, support new gun restrictions. However, some people affirm that the Second Amendment protects the individual(s) right to own a gun. They state guns are needed for self-defense from the threats ranging from local criminals to foreign invaders (gun-control.procon.org, 2016). Gun ownership deters crime rather than cause more crime.
Gun Control has both advantage and disadvantage sides. One of the pro side of the gun control law is that The Second Amendment is not an unlimited right to own guns. Meaning people have right to own a gun, however that does not mean the right is unlimited. People have to follow the rules in order to possess a gun. The con side of the gun control law is The Second Amendment of the US Constitution protects individual gun ownership. The Second Amendment of the US Constitution reads, "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." According to this amendment, it gives people a right to own the gun which does not help with the gun control laws.
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.
Every day some news related to gun violence are being heard all over the world. Shooting in driveway, public places, schools, homicide and suicide are some of different types of gun violence. Shooting on people and killing them is a big issue in the world and different comments are provided about that. One of the most important of them is about gun control laws. Stingl (2013) says “The term gun control as it is used in the United States refers to any action taken by the federal government or by state or local governments to regulate, through legislation, the sale, purchase, safety, and use of handguns and other types of firearms by individual citizens.” According to this idea gun control laws should be stricter and people should not be able to have access to guns easily. However, there are many other people who believe this idea is not a good solution and never help. This essay will demonstrate for and against views about the topic. People who agree with this idea consider: firstly, stricter laws will reduce violence and gun control means crime control. Secondly, some research shows people with gun are more at risks of getting shot. Thirdly, guns can always be misused by their owners and finally, stricter law is the best and the faster way to control crime and make community safe. While opponents say first of all, guns are necessary for people safety and protection. Secondly, guns are not the only tools for killing and violence; there are other weapons too and finally, gun ownership is human rights.
The fact that purchasing a firearm in some states involves many regulations and requirements, but purchasing ammunition does not even require an age limit is egregious in my opinion. I believe that remarkable types of ammunition, such as armor-piercing rounds, should not be available to the common people. Ammunition like this was made specifically to penetrate or do more damage, inferring that the people purchasing it intend to do more harm. Thus, special types of ammunition should be restricted, allowed only to those licensed and permitted to use such things.