Roger McGrath and Warren Burger provide different perspectives on the continuing debate over gun regulation in the United States. Although these authors establish opposing conclusions, both understand that gun related crimes are becoming increasingly common and therefore pose a threat to the domestic tranquility of the nation. Their controversy is centered around whether or not increased gun restrictions will lower criminal activity. McGrath, in his article “A God-Given Natural Right”, argues that increased gun control will only disarm law abiding citizens leaving them defenseless therefore providing incentives for criminals to break the law. However, Burger’s emphasis on the unrestricted distribution of firearms in his article “The Right to
Gun control has been a controversial issue for many years. Many citizens believe that if gun control is strictly enforced it would reduce the threat of crime. People have the right to bear arms for protection, or even just the pleasure of hunting and recreational activity. With the recent events involving firearms and mass shootings, people are skeptical whether to increase or decrease gun laws. Americans have a constitutional right to own handguns and stricter laws and licensing will not effectively save lives.
George Mason, the co-author of the Second Amendment to the Constitution once stated, “I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” Freedom from slavery is the reason many people came to this country, and the right to bear arms is a fundamental part of this freedom. Gun control is a type of slavery that many people do not recognize. Civilian possession of handguns should not be banned in the United States.
Being a debate, the conflict theory is a very applicable theory that can be applied to guns/gun control laws and their roles in society. A debate is something that is associated with conflict, so by observing how deep and exactly in what directions this conflict extends, one might be able to understand this topic in a new light. In other words, by analyzing the very nature of this argument, this sociological perspective can be used to generate a deepened understanding of the debate on the extent of gun control laws.
One of the most debated and intense arguments is the issue on gun control and gun policies. Gun control and gun rights is always an emotional topic that has been fought in the political arena for many years, especially during presidential elections. Gun control proponents want to see all guns extinguished and they believe that guns are a key problem to crime, but gun rights advocates believe that the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the Constitution. Gun control is not the solution to limiting or restricting crime.
After all the arguing, the ratification process was in full force. The responsive argument, according to Vandercoy, widely made was that Congress might be able to confine the existing militia force, all armed citizens, to a select militia made up of a small segment of the population. The delegates were trying to eliminate the possibility that game laws, used effectively in England at different points to disarm the population, would not produce a similar result in America. He summarizes the state ratification process; three states ratified while expressing their understanding that the people had a right to bear arms, and two states refused to ratify until individual rights were recognized as amendments.
The Second Amendment of the United States 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” (McClain and Tauber, 516). Controversy has aroused because of the interpretation of this amendment. In a modern society, the meaning of “Militia” is “a group of people who are not part of the armed forces of a country but are trained like soldiers” (“Militia”, Merriam-Webster). As a matter of fact, the debate on gun control was settled in 1791, that is over 200 years ago and a lot has changed since then. During that time, civilians were obligated to participate if their state was on battle, it was necessary for individuals to bear guns at home.
A weapon in the wrongs hands is the maximum danger humanity can face. Nowadays, violence and delinquency in society are viewed as the maximum problem solver. Humanity is full of chaos; hate and envy seize our souls. Guns are the ultimate security for some citizens but for others, these add to a feeling of defenselessness. Throughout history, any topic related to guns means a plethora of problems. One of the most controversial issues our nation faces today is gun control laws. This controversy has been created due to the different interpretations of the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution which states the right of citizens to bear arms; “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” (Cornell Law School). Anti-gun control laws believe that the amendment guarantees the right to bear any kind of firearms. On the other hand, we have does that believe that more controls laws should be implemented since the 2nd amendment was for the right of States to have an armed militia during wartime. Both sides have strong point, however, the safety of our children comes first, and a firearm means death in the wrong hands.
It is clear and evident and most Americans know about about it and some have contrasting opinions and views of it. It is the ongoing heated debate of Gun Control in the states whether there should be more stricter laws on them. We have all seen and heard
Gun Control is the most debated argument in United States of America today. Many government officials still hold to the 2nd Amendment, which bluntly states, "... the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." This being part of the Constitution, it bears a lot of credibility. According to be this is not right because from this government is giving too much people freedom to people. Recent shooting has been occurred in many schools and colleges which have disturbed school environment by creating fear in peoples mind. Gun control is a rule of sales. And it is also an ownership of firearms. Right now gun control
The US Constitution consists of ten amendments that govern all states. More importantly, these ten amendments established the rights of the people, and created the foundation of our government. Ever since the creation of the Constitution in 1787, the objective for creating the US Constitution and its amendments, has withstood the scrutiny of subjective interpretation. In today’s world, demands for government mandated gun control seems to provoke endless heated arguments over individual and big government interpretations of the second amendment in relation to the individual rights of the people.
The U.S has the highest percentage of guns to people than anywhere else is the world. This can bring up issues on gun control, which this argumentative article is about. There is a lot of people that thing guns need better controlling but this article is trying to reach out the the younger generation and show them that guns aren't as bad as many make them seem to be. This article uses very heavy logos and pathos to try to persuade the reader how guns are not bad for people to have.
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.” The forefather’s intention in giving this right to the citizens of the United States was to protect and ensure that one was capable to defend himself from the government and be free of the military and keep the government in check if it were to try to control its people. The right to keep and bear arms was given because at the time the British government had outlawed the possession of arms by citizens so that the British military could control the citizens and the forefathers knew that to keep the government in check and prevent total control by the military the citizens must have the right to keep bear arms.
Due to recent unfortunate events in America, a very popular opinion is that this country needs stricter gun control laws. While in essence this may seem like a good idea, as many would put it, “we do not live in a perfect world.” There are multiple faults to stricter gun control that would not benefit our country. With the unconstitutional proposal of stricter gun control laws comes insecurity, lack of self-defense, and the end of freedom.