Web. 15. Feb. 2013. Summary Member of the republicans state that banning of assault weapon is not going to answer the questions. You’ve to find out who has the access to those guns, especially when people are irrational, deranged and so forth.
Retrieved December 8, 2011, from http://unu.edu/wpcontent/uploads/publication/000/001/370/report417.pdf Providers. (n.d.). - National Non-VA Care Program Office. Retrieved August 3, 2014, from http://www.nonvacare.va.gov/providers.asp Veterans Affairs Strategic Plan 2014-2020. (2013).
30 November 2014. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/opinion/let-shooting-victims-sue.html?_r=0 Olson, Walter. “Six Myths About The Law That Bans Gun Lawsuits” Powerline. 19 March 2013. Web. 30 November 2014. http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/03/six-myths-
They are allowed to maintain arms in their possession, at some point they might be used either by these people or somebody else. Also, in case the government controls the people’s right to own guns, there is a strong chance the tyranny to become a governing political system. Emphasizing British tradition, Cooke says that, “the right to bear arms-is an essential right in any free society.” However the definition of a free society is difficult to agree on, as it is different from one society to another. Every society has special characteristics in its own way. Conservative societies normally follow strict rules that build with as time goes by.
Print. In his piece “A Well-Regulated Militia” Paul Fussell discusses the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms. Fussell expresses his opinions of the National Rifle Association of America’s interpretation of the Second Amendment and their lack of acknowledging the entire amendment. Fussell informs readers that on the right panel of the NRA’s entrance it reads, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Fussell also informs that the left panel does not state the first half of the quotation which states, “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.” Fussell declares that by leaving out the first half of the quotation that “The NRA doesn’t want to remind anyone of the crucial dependent clause of the Second Amendment, who’s latter half alone it is so fond of invoking to urge its prerogatives”(146). He offers that the NRA is not willing to accept the Second Amendment in its entirety and what is was meant for.
Advocates of open carry often refer to their constitutional rights of being law abiding and responsible gun holders. They want to exercise their freedoms and will vehemently reject any attempt to restrict those freedoms. It is their case that law abiding citizens are the first line of defense against violence. In situations such as Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut or the Century movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, advocates will argue that having their weapons openly visible would have deterred these criminals from committing such heinous acts. They will contend that criminal prefer victims or target who are not armed and that gun control regulations should be aimed towards criminals, not responsible, law abiding citizens.
Although Heller established that owning firearms is an individual right and that handguns are protected under the law, the ruling left many questions unanswered. Some questions addressed to what extent are firearms protected, how far could a state regulate firearms, what are reasonable regulations, and if it is a fundamental right. This literature review addresses the legal controversy surrounding the McDonald case by proposing these questions: What is the procedural history of the case? What are the facts of the case? What was the reasoning the judges used in the case?
Throughout the Constitution, organized operatives designated by the state are referred to as the militia, and the citizens are referred to as the people of the United States. Over the past decade there has been much debate on concealed carry laws regarding personal firearms. Currently there are forty-eight states that allow concealed firearms by their citizens. The Second Amendment of the Constitutional Bill of Rights 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” (Bill of Rights). Much of the debate comes from the meanings imposed by our founding fathers when the Constitution was composed.
GUN CONTROL “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.” This amendment has created a debate for the United States, which has caused controversy throughout the American people. Some argue that the amendment creates an individual constitutional right for citizens of the United States. The phrase "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" clearly states that citizens should be able to bear arms for protection. Under this "individual right theory" the United States Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession, or at the very least, the Amendment renders prohibitory and restrictive regulation presumptively