One of the major points against gun control is the violation of your second amendment rights, you have the right to keep and bear arms for personal protection. This paper will show there is no common sense in banning all firearms as a means gun control and it leaves law abiding citizens increasingly vulnerable to violent crimes. No Common Sense in Gun Control Over the past forty years, legislators have spent a lot of time, effort and revenue on legislation regarding gun control. Gun control advocates insist that increased gun control will lower the soaring crime rates of the early 70's. However, “recent research on the prevalence of defensive gun use has prompted growing concern that government efforts to regulate gun ownership and use may be counterproductive” (Ludwig, 2000, p. 363).
They were either pursuing a better life, new opportunities, or just running away from a political system. Here they found peace, tranquility and opportunity for advancement — the so-called” American Dream”. Illegal immigration is one of the most controversial issues in the United States, but the new the Arizona law has provoked intense debate from Texas to Montana, drawing support in several polls and generating rejection by major civil rights groups. That is, Americans are trying to correct unlawful immigration dilemma with laws that infringe people’s freedom, liberty and equality. Although the federal government stills working on the immigration reform, according to Arizona’s law, it is a state crime not carrying immigration documents.
The Miranda Rights The Miranda Rights helps ensure that citizens’ rights are being carried out under the U.S. Constitution. It all started with the story of the famous court case Miranda v. Arizona, which began in 1963 concerning the arrest of a young man named Ernesto Miranda. It had a significant impact on the way police officers in the United States do their jobs. It gave basis to new rules to help ensure the fair treatment of criminal suspects. “The case captured nationwide attention which focused on a central issue in American law enforcement: How can the legal system balance the rights of the accused with the rights of law-abiding citizens (Sonneborn, page 5)?” Miranda v. Arizona (1963) was one of the most controversial court cases that spread nationwide.
Border Patrol agents not only use their authority and racial profiling at checkpoints, they have gone as far as raiding Latino communities and workplaces to find illegal immigrants. In this situation, the Latino workers were the target and are on a continuous basis. “These policies have unjustly expanded the purview of and undermined basic trust in local law enforcement, alienated immigrant communities, and created an atmosphere of fear anti-immigrant rhetoric has led to a dramatic increase in hate crimes against and racial profiling of Latinos” (aclu, 2012). A more relative example of profiling is what the governor of Arizona signed into law in April 2010. “On April 23, 2010, Arizona governor Jan Brewer signed into law a discriminatory and un-American law that will require police officers in Arizona to ask people for their papers based only on some undefined "reasonable suspicion" that they are in the country unlawfully.
This classification makes sense because if crime is caused by terrorists; terrorist will cause crimes. If the majority of minorities are in prisons, then people of color will end up in prison. On the opposing side of racial profiling, many minorities feel that it is a form of racial discrimination that only hurts the good image law enforcement upholds. For example, the California Highway Patrol has recently been taken to court for the misuse of racial profiling. Therefore, a compromise must be made because it would be ideological to believe that there can be a government that bans the use of racial identification.
Rick Perry then later decided to send 1,000 guardsmen to the border to assist the Texas Department of Public Safety’s “Operation Strong Safety”. Critics of Perry’s move say the deployment is needless, because crime along the border is relatively low, and surge of Central American migrants over the last year — mostly unaccompanied children. Even though Critics of Perry’s say that his action was unnecessary, at least someone stepped in and took action unlike the Obama. Obama did have good intentions in helping the Mexico and Central America by trying to find a way to help improve the South’s economy to reduce the number of immigrants crossing the border and provide shelter for under age immigrants, but he delayed working with the immigration reform then eventually deciding to postpone the reform.
Wills’ claims that the federal government's chief law enforcement official might need a refresher course on federal law pertaining to legal immigrants. Some American legislators have taken up the position that prohibiting bilingual ballots would be racist. However, evidence shows that millions of other American citizens feel that prohibiting the bilingual ballot is a step in the right direction. Wills’ begins his article with a political anecdote quoted by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. When he was asked whether he would favor the prohibition of the bilingual ballot, he simply stated, “Of course not.” Wills’ continues in the next section stating that our national identity and our federal laws are being weakened by immigration that is influenced by these bilingual ballots.
The Destruction of the American Freedom An instruction memo, discarded by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) states, “under certain circumstances, the FBI has the ability to bend or suspend the law and impinge upon the freedom of others”. Federal counter-terrorism agencies like FBI and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) protect citizens and the constitution of the United States of America.. However, what happens when these agencies stop believing in the laws they are to enforce? In the novel, Little Brother by Cory Doctorow, the DHS, turns San Francisco into a police state and break the law they are to preserve. The DHS is so determined to protect society from terrorism that ultimately they destroy the freedom that they are striving to protect.
American View on Immigration Immigrants and immigration has played a major role in the history of our country. The United States population of immigrants came from Europe, Asia, Africa, South America and mostly, Mexico. Therefore, one would ask why state governments are enforcing laws such as SB 1070 to discriminate and profile Mexicans or any colored people who appear to be of Hispanic descent. The Arizona Law states that any Hispanic, or anyone who looks “illegal”, must show proof or identification that he or she is a legal American citizen. If they are caught as an illegal immigrant, they are sent to jail or confinement till further notice.
Alabama Immigration Law In June 2011, a new bill concerning illegal immigrants was signed into law. This bill is called the “Hammon-Beason Alabama Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act” or “Alabama HB 56.” It is an anti-illegal immigration bill and it is regarded as America’s harshest anti-illegal immigration law to date, just above Arizona’s anti-illegal immigration law that caused quite a stir in the media and has been constantly challenged, headed to the supreme court soon. Signed into law on June 9, 2011 by Governor Robert J. Bentley, the law was written by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, and cosponsored by Alabama State Senator Scott Beason and Alabama Representative Micky Hammon. The law was passed by the Alabama House of