Freedom of speech benefits the people and lack of it is a major cause of totalitarianism. That is why freedom of speech shouldn’t be limited. Stephan was a deacon in the time of the apostales he was very bold for his religious opinion, some hated it but some loved it and even became baptized. However the Pharisees ruling the area realized they would lose control if he kept preaching so they arrested him and put him on trial. When he spoke
The truth is the second amendment or the right to bear arms is still in place to protect us from being at the mercy of a dictator. In fact Piers Morgan stated “The second Merrell3 amendment isn’t there for duck hunting, it’s there to protect us from tyrannical government and street thugs, 1776 will commence again if you try to take away our firearms. (Gun control 2016)” Some Americans may also take freedom of religion for granted. Only having one religion would be simple, but what Americans do not realize is that countries that do only have one religion normally have a dictator.
The FBI seems to be making strides in preventing terrorist attacks, but this action should be made without social profiling and trolling the internet. Also, the repeal of Net Neutrality is another right being stripped from Americans. We deserve the right to an accessible internet that does not economically discriminate. All in all, the government does not have the right to monitor or limit internet content, as it skews our checks and balances system. Without these checks and balances we evolve into a country that oppresses its citizens.
If you were to ask someone why is it that they stop at a red light, they’re response would most likely be “I don’t want to break the law and go to jail.” The reality is that we must obey the law not because of the fear of going to jail, but to create order in preventing a harmful outcome. Our government instills fear in our society to follow the law because that is the most effective way to dominate our behavior. “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry G-d”, delivered by Jonathan Edwards, a strict Puritan priest, is remembered as the most famous sermon ever preached on American soil. Today it appears in almost every anthology American Literature and stands alone as the only sermon included.
To emphasize, the Second Amendment is a American citizens right, but this privilege can be taken away if one does not abide by the laws of American society. Therefore, the Second Amendment is of great controversy in America. The federal government should not have a say about the second amendment; just uphold the law. In the event, the federal government may set Categorical Grants on gun laws for states, will we as Americans lose our Second Amendment rights, this is what many citizens in American society are concerned about. Coupled with, sometimes it is not about who is right, it is about what is best for the greater good of American citizens.
The people who are against immigration want it to get rid of it or they want it to be extremely limited in our country. One person who talked about how limiting immigration and stopping people from coming to the United States is a good change for us is David Goldman. In his article “President Trumps Immigration Ban is Magnificently Right” Goldman says that Trumps 90-day travel ban is “callous towards individual Muslims but merciful to American citizens, who have the right to go about their business without fear of mass terrorist attacks.” (Paragraph 3).
Andrew Valdez Mr.Young 5th/English October 7, 2015 Bill of Rights Essay “ The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government”-Thomas Jefferson. The Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights is the most important amendment because it helps protect people from people who might want to hurt them, and it also allows people to hunt for their food. I believe that it is important because it helps it helps protect people 's lives. Maybe someone is going to rob you and you don 't have any way to defend yourself.
Many people are debating that Citizens United is a threat to democracy, but I think Citizens United has a significant impact in promoting freedom of speech. There are some reasons, which make Citizens United support freedom of speech. First of all, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abrigding the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people preceably to assemble”(Canon, David pg 96), that is the most famous statement in which describes the First Amendment. And how Citizen United relates to the Freedom of Speech? The First Amendment is created to serve people and it should be serve for only people, so everyone should have a right to speak and listen
According to the first amendment everyone has the freedom of speech, but does that include putting other children at risk for not choosing to no inoculate others? Parents have the right to exercise their religion and not vaccinate their children, but that also puts children who are to young to receive their vaccinations at risk. Some parents have the preconceived notion that the new “cocktails” of vaccinations are to blame for the contraction of autism in their children which is why they refuse to inoculate their children. Having said that, one of our founding principles is “individualism”, we have to respect people’s decisions even if it is outside the cultural norm. Although, medical evidence is inconclusive at this point in time, however the research is still ongoing.
the right to bare arms is one of the biggest laws in the constitution. Gun rights and laws have been an argumentative issue in the United states for a long time. Most people in the united states believe they should stay legal,and shouldn’t be hard to get a hold of. Others believe it is a danger to others and themselves,and that guns should be illegal without a shadow of a doubt.but that’s what this article is about. This explanation is about why the opponent is stating why it should be legalized,or shouldn’t be tampered with.
The 4th Amendment may be aggravating for the police, but on the other hand is beneficial for United States citizens. The 4th Amendment preserves protection, produces citizens to feel secure, and prohibits insignificant searches. Without the involvement of the 4th Amendment in the United States, government or authorities could invade privacy and go through citizen’s belongings without any type of
Per this rule, the issue is a violation of the Fourth Amendment. David Riley was driving with expired tags when he was arrested. The police impounded the car when they realized that his license was suspended. Policy states that when a car is impounded, an inventory search must be conducted. He was arrested for possession of loaded firearms.
The fourth amendment protects citizens from unlawful search and seizure. In order for a search and seizure to happen the police have to have evidence in order to get a warrant which allows them to search the citizens luggage, house, etc. In some cases the government may go to far, or invade privacy of others, but in this case the government didn’t go to far and this is proven in DLKs case, thermal imager, and heat image. In DLKs case he was taking reasonable expectation of privacy in the activities he was doing in his home.
Some people may think that the 14th amendment does a poor job of protecting people’s rights. In document five it explains how on September 11, 2001,with the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, it has caused video surveillance in the United States to increase. For example the U.S has programs that use facial recognition that help match photographs of criminals faces to the criminal. Another program that we use helps prevent suicide bombers from attacking. Some people may think that prevention of terrible events reoccuring or occurring is a good thing, but using security systems everywhere may be a violation of their rights and privacy.
The Fourth Amendment the Search and Seizure amendment was first passed by Congress on September 25, 1789 (National Constitution Center) that states the right of people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures (National Constitution Center). For the first one hundred years after this amendment was This amendment of the Constitution has been used by both civilians and governmental officials as proof of why they believe an incident that occurred was fair, or unfair. However, there have been times when deciding the fairness or unfairness has not been crystal clear. For instance, the case of Tennessee v. Garner that was first argued on October 30, 1984, and later decided upon on March