Second Amendment Is Flawed

976 Words4 Pages
The Second Amendment interpretation is flawed by In Molly Ivins's article, "Ban the Things. Ban Them All." She supports the Second Amendment, and she points out the main objective of signing this document is the authorization of a group of individuals that's trained to carry fire arms, even though they are not part of government. They may carry arms for security purposes in order to maintain a free state, and that this group of individuals have the right to keep and carry arms. The authors' main argument, is against individuals that are not trained to carry arms, nor do these individual carry arms to maintain a free state. But they believe it's their right. People who claim to believe in the "Right to Bear Arms," doctrine think that it refers to individuals. However there are a lot of people that misinterpret this document, they believe this document gives the individual the right to keep and carry arms. In today's society guns are not necessary unlike the uncertainties people had of the new frontier, there are no longer hostile forces to contend with, nor are there any fierce animals, therefore unrestricted gun laws are becoming a disaster, in this society. There's no need to hunt food anymore, and those that hunt for sports should be licensed to carry guns. There should be stricter gun laws, for those who are permitted carry guns, and they should be required to renew their license every three months with a hefty fee attached, and long hours of discipline training if they are allowed a license to kill. Every three months, citizens that carry a license to kill should be made to undergo eye exam, mental testing, and testing for any drug use. I believe that every citizen of this country has the right to bear arms, especially when temperatures gets hot in the summer months, and there's no air conditioning. When temperatures start to rise in the summer
Open Document