Paul Barrett's Essay: The Right To Bear Arms

He supports his argument by saying that making strict gun laws will lead to a time where only the terrorists and bad guys will have guns, leaving the other citizens unarmed and unprotected. He believes that the people are responsible for killings with firearms and not the guns. The first and second debaters in text 2 share the same attitude towards gun laws as Donald Trump. The text compares guns with cars.

The 2nd amendment, “the right to bear arms”, has been in the news most recently and many believe that since people are dying of guns that guns kill people and now many people think that the 2nd amendment should be banned. The right to bear arms wasn’t just so people could carry a weapon at any time it was made so people had protection, not only for themselves but for their state ( such as a national guard ). Now people are debating that only that the state militia should have guns, but others say that guns provide protection and defense for

Gun Control Gun Control has been a long debated issue in America. Two authors with unique views were selected as experts on the topic. The War on Guns: Arming Yourself Against Gun Control Lies by John R. Lott Jr. & Living with Guns: A Liberal 's Case for the Second Amendment by Craig R. Whitney. According to author John Lott, “The War on Guns: Arming Yourself Against Gun Control Lies,” methodically dismantles one modern gun-control myth after another.

DeGrazia also believes that owning a gun increases the likelihood that a person will be killed in their own home whether accidentally or intentionally (Hsiao and Berstein). The Democratic Party believes that stricter background checks will deter guns from being purchased by the wrong people. That might be true, but will it stop a violent person from committing a

Disturbed people with guns kill people. Maybe this is a point we can all try to agree on? Maybe we can all agree that we have a real public safety issue in the United States today caused by a system that is broken. Unfortunately, we have lots of evidence of what can go wrong when the system fails. It 's time for people to stop talking and start offering real answers.

Hence Federalists came up with the Bill of Rights as a way to get the Constitution ratified and for people to really see a needed change. The Bill Of Rights which lists specific prohibitions on governmental power, lead the Anti-Federalists to be less fearful of the new Constitution . This guaranteed that the people would still remain to have rights, but the strong central government that the country needed would have to be approved. The 1804 Map of the nation shows that even after the ratification of the United States Constitution there still continued to be “commotion” and dispute in the country.(Document 8) George Washington stated that the people should have a say in the nation and government and everything should not be left to the government to decide.(Document 3) Although George Washington was a Federalist many believed he showed a point of view that seemed to be Anti-Federalists. Many believed that The Bill of Rights needed to be changed and modified and a new document’s time to come into place.

This is wrong how our government allows gun laws to slide by just because the constitution gives us the right to bear arms. Has anyone ever considered revising this outdated list of rights given to the citizens of the United States? Gun control laws would reduce the societal costs associated with gun violence. Shootings in the United States have turned into an expensive illicit relationship. From the cost of medical care, investigations, and in many cases death.

Many will name different and more political reasons as to what the causes of “congressional gridlocking” is. My answer isn’t as political. I believe that one of the reasons for inaction is that congress is too stubborn. I believe that the government should learn to evolve and create new rules or balances to help pass laws to fix demanding issues. A more political solution or way to put it, I guess, is to use an example I found during my research.

The Bill of Rights is something the American people hold close to them, especially their right to bear arms. Recently there has been a lot of debate over implementing gun regulations without infringing on the rights of the people. While a position of this is expressed in Wayne LaPierre’s “Universal Background Checks Mean Gun Registration, Gun Bans and Confiscation”, Jeffrey Toobin’s “So You Think You Know the Second Amendment” provides a more valid position evaluating the issue of gun control. Universal background checks are a big discussion lately in our country’s current climate.

If an “undeveloped brain” was the case then teens would kill at roughly the same rates all over the world, which is not. Some of these teens think they can get away with some of these crimes which leads to commit more. In Jennifer's article she explains one of her case with a serial killer. His parents will fix everything whenever he got in trouble. After series of other

“The Actions Taken to Reduce Gun Violence” “Yes, people pull the trigger - but guns are the instrument of death. Gun control is necessary, and delay means more death and horror.” Guns are bringing too much horror to this world. Guns are being used to bring too much harm and they must be controlled.

“To conquer a nation first disarm its citizens” (Adolf Hitler). The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution says, "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 Constitution protects the rights for an American citizen in the United States to bear arms to provide security. Throughout American history, guns have been used to protect families, whether used in war or for protection in the home. Although the amendment was put in place to protect the American people, disasters such as school shootings, assassinations and bloody massacres prompted questions to come up regarding restraints on the law, and what kind of people are allowed to own guns, and be trusted with them.

The article “Gun Control Laws” (2016) emphasizes the point that the United States views on gun control vary from person to person. For example, supporters of the stricter gun control laws believe that by enforcing stronger gun control laws throughout the nation it will decrease the amount of gun violence. In addition to stricter gun laws, supporters believe that the United States needs to make it more difficult to obtain a gun. However, opponents of the gun control laws, that believe the federal government is abusing their power, think that guns are the only way to stop other guns. Furthermore, opponents believe that limiting Americans ability to purchase a firearm is taking away their second amendment.

Gun Control Debate Jake Novak, in an article for CNBC titled, “Gun control isn’t the answer. We already know how to stop the violence,” gives his opinion regarding the controversial issue of gun control. Novak argues that gun control is not the answer to rising gun violence but that proper enforcement of the law would go a long way in reducing the cases of gun violence in America. He states, “We actually solved the issue of rising gun violence in America in the mid-1990’s and again in the early 2000’s by doing something radical. We enforced the law” (Novak 28).