Argumentative Essay: The Need For Gun Control

1635 Words7 Pages
Research Paper Weapons have always distinguished mankind from animals. Animals use their resources and instincts for survival, while a man relies on weapons to bring about destruction. Guns give man the sense of power and control over nature, however, they are no empowerment, longer used for hunting, but instead are involved in cases of domestic violence, mass shootings and at blame for the loss of lives of innocent children. We cannot solely blame the gun owner, although they are at much fault themselves. We must also find culpability in the individual who sold the weapons. Whether this was obtained in legal or illegal circumstances, it does not change that fact that we need to create regulations on automatic weapons.Weapons like everything else, should have limits. For example a person cannot have more than 2-3 dogs or they will be cited. Another example is that although we have freedom of speech, we can not yell fire in a crowded room where there is no fire; there are limits to our free speech. Why do we have limits on everything else but weapons, does human life no longer have value. We have…show more content…
However, there's too much freedom in regards to gun control. The second amendment clearly states that the need for arms is only necessary in case of a militia to form. We as a country are no longer in the need of a militia since we are not in the wild west (constitution amend 2). Another valid argument that if we were ever in a deficit of soldiers we would draft them like it happened in the Vietnam war. The second amendment says that we have the right to bear arms, but it never specifies their intentions. Although this is true, there is doubt that the founding fathers thought that there was a need to specify which weapons we could possess and who they could be issued to. The intention of the second amendment was to protect ourselves not to destroy one
Open Document