Entitlement To Bear Arms Essay

Gun control is an issue that has been discussed and analyzed a lot in the past few years. Although our country has tried to establish gun control laws and what to do with guns, the United States still continues to struggle with gun control due to the vast interpretations that people (namely politicians) have on the Second Amendment. It 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.” This means that to secure being of a free state, people have the rights to “keep and bear Arms.” In one elucidation, the controversy can be interpreted as asking ourselves where to stop. Do we stop at the fact that we have the rights and that nobody can stop us from using them, or do we dig deeper and try and fully understand what our founding fathers meant? I strongly believe that to discuss gun control properly, people need to put their feelings and partisans aside and look at the conflict from a neutral standpoint. From there, people see that the Second

The Second Amendment gives legal entitlement to bear weapons and ammunition if someone wants or needs it. But the controversy is driven by the word “entitlement,” which is something that provides benefits to any individual meeting certain eligibility requirements given to a person by the government. The Second Amendment’s purpose is to protect a person from the government, but the entitlement is given to a person from the government: the same people they are trying to be protected from. This confusion makes the amendment arcane since it holds no meaning in the modern world. And reaching even further, we see that the issue extends to whether humans are allowed to kill others with guns or if we are even capable of stopping it. This leads to the explanation of the two sides: to use guns freely, or to control a person’s gun