The Pros And Cons Of Gun Control

The Second Amendment to the United States gives American citizens the right to own guns. The opinion of the court is that the men (Republican or Democrat) who lead this country should be allowed to protect themselves. The court’s opinion suggests that every citizen has the right to bear arms. We could defend ourselves from others who try to harm us. Here are some reasons why we should be able to own guns.

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right of the individual to keep and bear firearms. When the Second Amendment was written it was for the right to arm oneself as a personal liberty to deter undemocratic or oppressive governing bodies from forming and to repel impending invasions. Furthermore, gun advocates proclaim that guns are for the right to self-defense. Some people try to participate and uphold the law. We have seen how guns in the hands of children can cause fatal accidents and people have committed mindless crimes leading to

The second amendment of the Bill of Rights stipulates that the United States shall have a well-regulated militia. Reasoning for this is that as a free state, a well-regulated militia is necessary for the security amongst the citizens. The second amendment also provides that the people have the right to keep and bear arms. It is expressly specified that the latter right shall not be infringed.

The Second Amendment 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 (US Const. Amend. II, sec. 8).

Debates about the Second Amendment have focused on its parameter to protect private rights of individual people to possess firearms, and the ability to be apart of militia organizations. The world has seen a drastic change since the implementation of the amendment in 1791. Civilian ran militias are almost obsolete, and most militias are now ran and regulated by state governments. The military of the United states has also seen a dramatic increase, and is undoubtedly more powerful. For the most part, civilians are no longer expected or desire to be apart of a militia, however firearms are still essential for self defence, hunting, and

The right to bear arms has been a controversial issue ever since James Madison established it as the second amendment of the constitution. 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” (US Const. amend. II). Those in favor of the second amendment, believe that arms are used for protection, dangerous situations, and sports.

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.” Us americans don't need to “bear arms.” Some may say that many people use them to hunt but there are many other weapons you can use to hunt with as well as protecting yourself from danger. By having the second amendment, it gives criminals the right to go out and harm people, whether it be a family member, friend, someone you walk past. Statistics say that “The U.S. has an estimated 283 million guns in civilian hands.

And since the Constitution establish this as a right, the government have to ensure that citizens have access to arms powerful enough to defend themselves against a potential government tyranny. So, if I cannot afford a tank, the government has to buy one for me. Thus, the Second Amendment is not a valid argument as Hamilton and Jefferson did not foresee a time when governments would have weapons powerful enough to eliminate the human species. Bearing arms was also a collective right for militias, not an individual one for

It is interesting to note that today’s ardent gun advocates purposely ignore the first part of this amendment (A well regulated militia being necessary for to the security of a free State) and only quote the second part (…the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed). They know that the militia idea is unappealing in a civilized society and that this amendment as it is written 200 years ago does not make sense

The right to bear arms has been a controversial issue ever since James Madison established it as the second amendment of the constitution. 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” (US Const. amend. II). Those in favor of the second amendment, believe that arms are used for protection, dangerous situations, and sports.

The Second Amendment offers U.S. residents the right to keep arms. Sanctioned in December 1791, the modification states: James Madison primarily suggested the Second modification briefly immediately after the Constitution was legally sanctioned as a means to supply more energy to state militias, which today are regarded the National Guard. It was regarded an agreement amongst Federalists — those who promoted the Constitution as it was sanctioned — and the anti-Federalists — individuals who recognized states having additional energy. With just utilized guns and other arms to ward off the English, the modification was primarily produced to give individuals the possibility to fight back against a tyrannical federal administration. Interpretations of the Second Amendment Because its confirmation, Americans have been quarreling over the amendment's definition and explanation.

The Second Amendment 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.” Gun rights has become the subject of intense political, social, and cultural battles for much of the last century. The pro-gun right side has asserted that the right to arms was absolute, and that any gun control laws infringed that right (Kopel, 2013). This right has been supported by the Supreme Court who has reinforced what has become the American consensus that the Second Amendment allows the right to keep and bear arms, especially for self-defense, and that it is a fundamental individual

The use of and the owning of guns is a very hot and debated topic in society today. For many, this is a life and death debate due to the recent and numerous school shootings. These school shootings have caused an outcry for more gun control, specifically in relation to the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting. Despite these calls, increased gun control is not the answer. Most gun owners’ use their guns responsibly and for good purposes.

There is an estimation that about half of the households in the United States owns at least one gun. As such many people can have access to guns, including children and other family members. Many school based attacks involve young people carrying guns owned by their parents and going on a rage through schools and other places. Similarly, the ease of acquiring guns has led to vulnerable deaths of people across the country. Moreover, this leads obsessed people to escape their frustrations on minorities by murdering and threatening them.

Justino Gonzalez ELA 11 Unit 1 Argumentative Essay The Right to Bear Arms The right to keep and bear arms, often referred to as the right to bear arms, is the people's right to possess armaments or arms for their own defense, as described in the philosophical and political writings of Aristotle, Cicero, John Locke, Machiavelli, the English Whigs and others. This right is protected by the second amendment of the United States’ constitution, which was written on December 15th, 1791 as part of the first ten amendments contained in the Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment was based partially on the right to keep and bear arms in English common law and was influenced by the English Bill of Rights of 1689.