One may argue that guns should be completely outlawed, whilst another may argue the complete opposite -- making guns controversial. A common misconception about gun control is the means of doing so. The controlling of guns does not necessarily mean the taking away of guns from all American citizens, but the taking away of guns from unauthorized American citizens; otherwise known as gun regulation. Though it is stated in the second amendment that it is a right to “keep and bear arms,” the intentions at the time were that of a state facing tyranny. Hence, it was a sensible security to implement “well regulated militias” with the power to effectively resist.
Lastly, the true meaning of the Second Amendment very controversial. Gun rights groups suppose it means universal ownerships to any citizen while Gun Control groups take it as gun ownership should be reduced to those in militaries. Some further thoughts regarding this topic are implementing universal background checks on all purchasers of firearms. According to an article by Ariel Edwards for the Huffington Post, this would make it harder to purchase a firearm from a shop or privately if the potential buyer has been convicted of a misdemeanor violent crime in the past. Additionally, although there would be control on firearms, how well would they be enforced?
Gun Control and Mass Shootings in America Gun violence is an unquestionable issue in America, with the United States ranking as one of the worst with both homicides and suicides using guns. That being said, we outnumber Mexico in gun related deaths and among first-world countries we rank far above others in the number of gun deaths, such as England and Australia. Consequently, we live in one of the only first world countries that does not have extensive gun laws and restrictions to gun access. Aside from the countless homicides and suicides by firearm in this country, one particular issue within this predicament is mass shootings, with the most recent mass shooting occurring on February 14th, 2018 at a high school in Parkland, Florida where 17 people were killed. Although, it may seem like an easy fix to just implement gun control laws into our society to eliminate gun violence, but it is important to note that Americans own nearly half of all firearms globally, which is roughly 325 million guns; when
‘’Guns are responsible for over thirty-three thousand deaths in the United States annually, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).. In 2014, the CDC reported that 11,008 of the 15,872 homicides committed in the United States that year involved a firearm. Of the 42,826 suicides reported that year, 21,386 involved a firearm. These statistics have inspired efforts at the federal and state levels to enact gun control legislation to reduce crime and violence’’(‘’Gun Control’’). According to the statistic guns are held for over 33,000 deaths in the United States.
citizens is to reduce the success rate of suicide. Gun is dangerous because it can take one life away in a sudden if the correct places are shot. States with more guns tend to have more homicides. Back to 2001 to 2005, the state with the lowest rate of gun ownership had around 31.5% of firearm suicides out of all suicides (Matthew, M. & David, H., 2008). However, for the state with the highest rate of gun ownership, the firearm suicides rate out of all suicides is more than 64.3%.
Criminals know that they can get guns, however, the citizens cannot. These laws infringe upon the second amendment, which 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’’ (Declaration of Independence, Constitution of the United States, Taft-Hartley Act). If gun control laws were put into place across the nation, Americans would no longer have a militia if it was ever needed. By examining the issues surrounding gun control it is clear that prohibiting guns is not the answer to stopping violent crimes from happening; it only restricts law abiding citizens from protecting themselves. “Of 62 mass shootings in the United States between 1982 and 2012, 49 of the shooters used legally obtained guns.
However, there are many facts and points made about how the amendment is supposed to be treated and how guns are supposed to be used for both individual rights and militia. In fact, “The US Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that this amendment referred to the individual’s right to own a gun for self-defense. Other federal courts have ruled that this amendment pertains only to the rights to form and maintain a militia. Advocates of gun control point out that the writers of the Constitution could not have imagined some of the weapons that are currently available or the amount of damage that could be inflicted by one person armed with one of these guns. Gun control opponents insist there is a constitutional right for individuals to have weapons and vehemently argue against any restrictions
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.
Legal Issue: Gun Control Level 4: Author’s Point of View In the documentary, Bowling for Columbine, what is filmmaker Michael Moore’s thesis or main idea about the cause(s) of gun violence? I think that Michael’s thesis states that owning a gun does not make you violent, it is your perception of what guns are and what violence is. If a person were to pull the trigger , that is their decision that they have made. Guns are not violent if no one uses them. We as a society have many influences to our actions with guns, with a large portion of the influence coming from media.
The amendment is referencing the freedom of people to form military groups and own guns, not just everyday men. The Second Amendment 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.” During this time period (around 1776), militias (meaning people who formed groups to protect themselves and their homes) were used because of the country’s lack of an organized military (“The Second Amendment”). In today’s society, America has several branches of defense, including the Army, Air Force, Navy, the police, and more. There is simply no reason for civilians to form militias when they have so many organizations to defend them. As previously stated, this amendment refers to the right of the people to form groups and have guns in order for a democracy to truly work.
One article online states that gun related violence accounts for about 30,000 to 40,000 deaths every year in America. More than half of these deaths occur due to self infliction (Keidan 48). This makes it obvious that there should be a certain amount of gun laws in place to stop people from hurting each other. However, people commonly have to use guns for self defense. One such example of this happened when four masked men went into a smoke shop.
And there are so many reasons why. 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. This is the second amendment of the United States Constitution which was written in 1791 and has been debated ever since.Conceal and carry is the practice of carrying a weapon in
Even though gun laws prevent deaths, they infringe so many rights in the immutable Bill of Rights, which is one of the foundations of the great United States. Gun laws give too much power to the government and way less from the people, which will lead to government corruption. And, stated by ClearPictureOnline.com,”Guns don 't kill people, people do. We need to concentrate on the values and morals of our citizens and at the role the media plays in glorifying violence and the lack of respect for law.” (Shootout: Do We Need More Gun Control Regulations?) What people don 't understand is that they are taking away their own freedoms with Gun Control.
However, when gun control laws are implemented, it is proven that crime rates will not decrease. In 1999, 6.3 million violent crimes were committed in the U.S. (Laws.com) These violent crimes include rape, sexual assault, robbery, and assault. It was shown that only 8% of these crimes involved usage of a firearm. In the early 1970’s, around 19% of murders involved guns. When gun control laws were implemented, the rate raised to about 50%.
I agree with Mr. Kristof, gun violence has been ignored enough by the government and should be one of the governments priorities. Removing guns from America is too radical and “politically impossible” with some americans, yet Kristof finds a perfect balance with introducing “universal background checks,” “limits on gun purchases,” and “more research” on how to save lives from gun violence (Kristof). I admire how Kristof’s argument finds compromise between gun control supports and negators, for removing guns from the U.S. permanently would be unconstitutional and a violation of inalienable rights. I strongly agree that America should rectify gun laws since there are a plethora of people “waiting to go boom” and are qualified to get their “hands” on unrestricted weapons. The American government would save a multitude of lives if it were attentive with gun