Justice Thurgood Marshall Analysis

In spite of these developments, many argue that it was the intention of the Founding Fathers, so it must be kept as it is sacred. Firstly, it was the intention of the Founding Fathers to allow the practice of slavery. Secondly, we cannot treat a compromise as divine. It was not what the Founding Fathers wanted, but rather what they could tolerate (Rudalevige, 2016). It was just a temporary solution.

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.

JFK thought that by helping other, people could find success in society. People can not just help somebody and expect success though; they must understand that helping an individual is the right decision. Like JFK said “Not because the communist maybe doing it, not because we seek votes, but because it is right”(Kennedy 4). While Patrick Henry realized people achieved success up until they viewed something such as the painful truth. “We are opt to shut our eyes against a painful truth”(Henry 85).

When the colonists were still with Great Britain, King George III misused his power. As a result, colonists wrote the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, to the king, to state their separation from Great Britain, to form a new country, the United States of America. After creating a new country, Americans wrote the Articles of Confederation in the year 1777, which they purposely weakened central government, so the abuse of power, wouldn’t exist. This meant the states had all the power. Although this structure of government seemed great, the creators of the Articles quickly realized that with no central government, states weren’t united because they were busy on increasing the growth of only their state.

Currently in the twentieth century, many states view equality as a fundamental important principle. It has been seen as so important to such an extent that some countries have enshrined it their constitutions. However, for many years, across the globe, people of color were not judged by merit but by the color of their skin. This essay aims to the answer the question whether there was any possibility for Tom Robison to receive a fair trial. I assert that it was impossible for Tom to receive a fair trial due to the prejudice in Maycomb.

Borders of the First Amendment are at the center of the legal debates about free speech and hate speech. While free speech is considered to be a basic right, as the Supreme Court has given the right to free speech. However, when such "free speech" crosses the line and becomes a threat, the courts have stepped in and punished the speaker. First Amendment does not protect free speech that has the intention of doing harm or damage. Many people believe that the First Amendment gives the people right to say whatever they want but it’s not true.

America is the universal symbol of freedom. But is it really free? America at one time was defined by freedom, however now America defines freedom. Thus, altering the definition of the term. The founding fathers of America made specific rules for us to follow to keep peace and unity in our society, but over time those rules have been tampered with.

Everyone deserves the right to own their own guns, and should have the right to carry them wherever they go. If we were to do that then maybe all the shootings would no 't have happened, and more people would be protected rather than injured. All general topics have people for or against it, so is gun control as important as everybody thinks it is or is it overrated? The United States Constituion says this in Amendment 2:- “ 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 Second Amendment should in no way be changed or banned. Changing the aAmendment would just cause more confusion and frustration for the people changing it, and for the people .

Bump stocks are another point of interest for gun control supporters. A bump stock is an attachable stock to a firearm that simulates automatic fire by using the recoil of the gun to aid in successively pulling the trigger to increase fire rate. Gun control supporters are trying to get a ban on these attachments because they do not feel like civilians should have the power to own anything like an automatic weapon “He said he wanted the Department of Justice to ‘propose regulations that ban all devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns.’” Another focus is magazine size restriction. Advocates for gun control believe that 30 rounds is high capacity and any firearm should not be allowed to hold more than around 10 rounds. These are only a few of the things the supporters of gun control want to

Amending to the United States Constitution serves to be politically arduous within the contemporary generation today, as the stakes are low regarding which amendment will succeed through the amendment process. The Constitution ratified in the year 1788 serves to be a creed laid out by the Founding Fathers of America in the hope of establishing a country based on independent grounds capable of serving political and social values. The framers established the constitution within the grounds of law and order as it is composed of 27 amendments that mark political and social rights held by every individual. For example, the first ten amendments serve to be specific rights ratified in order to protect individual liberties (Sidlow and Henschen 42-43).