This gross oversight has been the core fallacy to many gun control campaigns. The primary reason gun control advocates are unable to prohibit firearms outright is that the Second Amendment protects the right to possess and bear weapons in general. Thinking about this issue from a completely unbiased point of view, one could conclude that just about anything from missiles to rocks can potentially be used as a weapon. The semantics used gun control advocates emphasize the guns lethality but our ancestors used sticks and stones in very lethal ways centuries ago. Imagine how absurd a “sticks and stones” control law would have sounded to them.
Gun Control Laws in America Firearms should not be restricted, nor should their accessories or capabilities. Placing laws that take away from our right to bear arms would only give negative effect on the safety of the general public and the amount of crimes committed. People need guns to protect themselves from the people who want to corrupt their lives by using guns, regardless of the law. Gun control laws vary from state to state. In the republic of California, some would say we have some of the worst laws and restrictions in the country.
The Second Amendment is a law that was formulated to give the citizens of The United States of America the right to own and bear firearms. More gun control laws have been set in place as a deterrent for criminals to purchase firearms. Gun control laws are not the only way to avoid and protect criminals from purchasing firearms. Even with the gun control laws, debates, the Second Amendment and the Tiahrt Amendment, there is a lack of enforcement of these laws which has caused more violence. There also has not been a reduction in the number of criminals with guns.
In conclusion, I am currently against gun control because I want to make sure that innocent citizens can have access to guns and be able to protect themselves against criminals when they need to. Until the government can find more effective ways to control criminals’ access to guns, I will be against gun
Gun control laws have become such a huge controversy in the United States due to the fact that citizens believe their Second Amendment right is being taken away from them. In my eyes, I believe that extended gun control measures should be taken to ensure that access to assault weapons should be limited to certain people. I believe one deserve a well rounded background check to see if any mental health issues are visible. I also believe you have the right to own a weapon and the government is not trying to take away your hunting rifles, personal permitted handguns, etc. They government is emphasizing more on the fully automatic weapons, explosives, armor and other things that only the military should have access to.
Gun casualties and incidents throughout the country have woken the public up from its ignorance and shown them the danger guns can pose to society (Martinez, 2013). While some people want a complete blanket ban on the ownership of guns, others wants an easier access to guns so that every person may look after their own security. Part of what makes the term gun control a very controversial topic is that it’s used in a ambiguous way that does not explain the details of the issue and the demands, apart from literally controlling guns. The two prominent sides of the debate are the groups who ask for liberal gun laws that make it easier for a person to procure guns and conversely, there are groups who want to repeal the second amendment. I personally am a strong believer that an “ideal society” should have no guns; nevertheless crime is a big problem to the citizens of our society and guns are necessary.
One side to this ongoing argument is that all guns in the United States need to be banned. Many Americans feel this way, believing that, “violence is out of control. Guns are a major cause. They should all be banned- the sooner the better.” To be exact nearly three out of four Americans, 73%, believe that guns need to be under a lot more control. 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.” (Bill of Rights).
The opponents of these laws say that Americans have the right to bear arms. They believe that the laws would stop individuals from defending their property of themselves. The significant disagreement that opponents argue is that the right to use and own weapons is a personal freedom promised by the Constitution. Individuals against gun control also think that certain people should not be allowed to own guns but also think that stricter laws can stop the needless loss of life. The debate over gun control has been one a main topic since the 20th century.
Should the United States abolish gun ownership? Introduction: The gun control debate poses the basic question: Who is more trustworthy, the government or the people? Argument A: Increases in gun control laws in the United States of America are unconstitutional. Increases in gun control laws in the United States of America are unconstitutional because the Second Amendment states that we have right to bear arms, citizens have the democratic ideal of life or justice, and statistics show that states with more gun rights have a lower crime rate. (Emotional arguments) Gun control is based on the faulty notion that ordinary American citizens are too clumsy and ill-tempered to be trusted with weapons.
Democrats in no way wish to undermine the right to the second amendment but do wish to establish strong laws to who can and cannot bear a gun for example restricting guns to be issued in the hands of previous criminals, stalkers, person going under mental services, background checks for gun sales, etc. not that someone doing right in society isn’t capable of doing such harm but that crime may be lessen in society this way the right is not taken away but