Why Guns Should Not Be Banned

1079 Words5 Pages
Every so often, there will be an event that will change your thoughts and perspective on a particular topic. The recent shootings at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida has led me to rethink my opinions on gun control as a whole. It is no surprise that mass shootings happen; from when I was in eighth grade and Adam Lanza 20 elementary school kids and 6 staff members, to my first year of college when Nikolas Cruz killed 17 people. These horrific mass murders may seem like a common thing to us but this is not normal worldwide, this is only a common thing here in the United States.
The Second Amendment gives citizens the right to bear arms and it states: "A well regarded 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 amendment was passed by congress in 1789 and ratified in 1791. This amendment was put into place 229 years ago and guns that existed 229 years ago were muskets and flintlock pistols compared to our modern AR-15 's and other automatic and semi-automatic weapons. Our guns have advanced over two centuries so why haven 't our laws to own guns changed? When we
…show more content…
On one hand, some argue that guns should not be banned and the Second Amendment protects their right to own firearms. From this perspective, I understand that guns may be utilized as a safety precautionary. On the other hand, however, others argue that more guns leads to more gun violence and gun related deaths. In the words of Press Secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, one of this view 's main proponents "I think if you look to Chicago where you had over 4,000 victims of gun-related crimes last year they have the strictest gun laws in the country. That certainly hasn 't helped there." According to this view, Chicago is used as an example that strict gun control does more harm than
Open Document