One may argue that guns should be completely outlawed, whilst another may argue the complete opposite -- making guns controversial. A common misconception about gun control is the means of doing so. The controlling of guns does not necessarily mean the taking away of guns from all American citizens, but the taking away of guns from unauthorized American citizens; otherwise known as gun regulation. Though it is stated in the second amendment that it is a right to “keep and bear arms,” the intentions at the time were that of a state facing tyranny. Hence, it was a sensible security to implement “well regulated militias” with the power to effectively resist. Evidently, guns mean something far more different to Americans today, whereas, in the past it was merely protection, today it prospers tradition: nourishment, recreation, and security from insecurities. However, the fact that guns foster …show more content…
Though this would be ideal, the idea only works theoretically. Because most guns are acquired without proper process, it would be an understatement to say this means of gun control would pose more of a challenge than it’s worth. As stated in James Jacob’s interview, only about ten percent of all “assault weapons” are entered into a registry and go through background checks, whereas, the remaining ninety percent are not (2). As for all guns, according to President Barack Obama, a disturbing ‘forty percent... are conducted without a background check’ (1). Although Obama supports gun control, he has contradicted himself. If almost half of the guns owned by U.S. citizens are acquired improperly, it is likely he will fail to remove the guns in which he wishes to control. As a result, more people will be left defenseless against the real perpetrators -- the ones who acquired firearms without the proper