ipl-logo

Should Gun Laws Be Changed Essay

1022 Words5 Pages

Imagine this, you worked at a store and a man walks in and put a gun to your head. What do you do? The government restricted access to guns and you have no way to defend yourself. This is precisely why gun laws shouldn’t be changed because changing gun laws would violate the statings of the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment grants an individual the right to own a firearm for defensive purposes. If people have been given this right and held onto it for the past couple of centuries, why should we change it now? Also, making gun laws stricter would leave people defenseless. Without guns how are people supposed to protect themselves from many dangerous factors? People sometimes only see the negative side of some problems and not the positive. …show more content…

The Second Amendment clearly states the right to own a firearm and if gun laws become stricter it would just go against it. The Founders understood the fact that the right to hold and bear arms is just as essential to maintaining a free country as the freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and many more rights stated in the Bill of Rights. If we made gun laws stricter it would interfere in the development of a free country. According to the NRA-ILA, “the Second Amendment states that as an American citizen, you have the individual right to arm yourself. The amendment also firmly establishes that the government cannot infringe on that right” (NRA-ILA). In other words, the Second Amendment clearly grants protection for an individual’s right to own a firearm. The Founders accounted for the effects of guns to this day and still permitted the usage of firearms. This adds to the idea of how the people that built up the laws that molded our society also believed in …show more content…

Even if we make gun laws stricter, who says that it's gonna stop others from acquiring firearms? As a matter of fact, it would just make the situation in our country worse. This is because while criminals are willing to go to any lengths to achieve their goal of obtaining a weapon, what happens to innocent citizens? This plays into the factor of how the residents of our nation won’t have any way to stop the criminals that illegally acquire their guns. According to Alper, “An estimated 287,400 prisoners had possessed a firearm during their offense. Among these, more than half (56%) had either stolen it (6%), found it at the scene of the crime (7%), or obtained it off the street or from the underground market (43%). Most of the remainder (25%) had obtained it from a family member or friend, or as a gift. Seven percent had purchased it under their own name from a licensed firearm dealer” (Alper). This adds to the idea of how the people have no choice but to give up their method of protection and yet allow dangerous criminals and even released prisoners to roam around with illegal weapons. This just goes to show that changing gun control laws would not only not have an impact on the number of firearms gained by criminals, but also leave the people of our nation

Show More
Related
591 Words | 3 Pages

The Second amendment is one that allows all americans to carry guns. Because of the school shootings and other massacres people are saying that they want to have gun restrictions. The way that they are wanting to just act like everything will be ok when they ban guns is almost a denile. Even if they make guns completely illegal people who have the desire to kill someone will still be able to do so if they wish. The gun bans are only occurring in the states not across the

Read More
485 Words | 2 Pages

The second amendment of the Bill of Rights stipulates that the United States shall have a well-regulated militia. Reasoning for this is that as a free state, a well-regulated militia is necessary for the security amongst the citizens. The second amendment also provides that the people have the right to keep and bear arms. It is expressly specified that the latter right shall not be infringed.

Read More
1024 Words | 5 Pages

Its enduring impact is through controversy and many debates. The Denotation and Speculation of the Second Amendment Amendment II reads, “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.” “Amendment 2 legal definition of Amendment” a website talking about the amendment, acknowledges that the amendment says it allows firearms, but with

Read More
2103 Words | 9 Pages

Does the second amendment prevent effective gun regulation? what is the right to bear arms?. The right to bear arms is to have weapons that are useful for protection when someone is trying to break into the peoples house or running up to the person and attacking him. The right to bear arms is the right to have protection, the second amendment has been a critical battle ground for the U.S because people say take the gun from people but the guns that they are takin is people that just stay at home they need to worry about drug dealers and gang members instead of civilians just resting at home so the battle ground for the U.S is they are taking the wrong peoples guns and doing that just cause more threat to the civilians who had guns for protection and those people are now trying to figure out how are they gonna defend themselves? how ar they gonna protect themselves if someone did break into their home?.

Read More
930 Words | 4 Pages

The Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights is the right to bear arms, which gives American citizens a constitutional right to own and purchase guns. It states, "A well-regulated

Read More
1025 Words | 5 Pages

The meaning, the purpose, and the need for the Second Amendment at the time are debatable. The amendment, as written in 1790, is stated as follows: 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. Adopted on December 15, 1791, these 27 words have been used as the main kindling for the ongoing national debate on gun control. The intended meaning behind these words has been debated in Supreme Court cases such as United States v. Cruikshank, wherein the Court stated, “The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.” Because of the perspectively interpretational manner in which the amendment was written, it is not clear whether the constitution protects gun ownership for the purpose of maintaining a civilian militia, or for the purpose of protecting individual gun

Read More
1293 Words | 6 Pages

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "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." Throughout history, there have been numerous attempts to repeal the second amendment, or limit the purchase of firearms, and what such firearms are used for. The second amendment is a constitutional right that shall never be taken away from the United States Constitution. Gun control laws should be left just the way they are, because they ensure enough civil security, and enough security from people without the qualifications of firearm purchase to not possess such equipment.

Read More
1297 Words | 6 Pages

In contrast, Opponents believe that arms should have regulations because they cause violence, such as mass shootings and murder. Despite the differences on each side, the second amendment aids in the protection of all individual rights of the people to keep and bear arms for self-defense when necessary. As a result, the definition of the right to bear arms has to be provided. The second amendment is quite a chicanery clause to understand, the first part of the clause states “ a well-regulated militia.” “Well regulated…” was defined in the eighteenth century, as properly but not overly regulated (Roleff 69).

Read More
694 Words | 3 Pages

The Second Amendment of the United States constitution reads: “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.” The right of all Americans to bear arms is a right the Founding Fathers held to equal importance as the constitution itself. (The Guardian, 2017). The idea of gun control laws directly violates this constitutional right. The NRA believes that gun control should not be under consideration.

Read More
1700 Words | 7 Pages

In the past, the major gun control legislations that have been put into effect have not stopped people from obtaining firearms (Gun Control.) There have also been cases in the past where cities have attempted to ban handguns. After the ban was put into effect, murder rates tended to rise instead of drop, unlike what most people might assume. Crime rates and violence also skyrocketed after the bans were put into effect. Another problem with taking guns away, or banning them, is that the government cannot expect everyone to abide by the laws.

Read More
883 Words | 4 Pages

There are different situations where a gun has come in handy for someone to protect either themselves, their family, friends, or strangers. In the article, Overcoming Delusions About the Second Amendment, written by Jeffrey Sachs, the article 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.” It takes a lot of work to amend an amendment. It could take years for the process to go through and there is a chance that they will not go through with amending the second amendment. If the second

Read More
914 Words | 4 Pages

People are afraid that the government is trying to take away the ever sacred second amendment, and that without weapons, the ordinary man cannot protect himself. This, however, is not the case. Creating these laws would mean that criminals would be less able to commit gun related crimes, and those who abide by the law would still have proper protection. Even if criminals acquire weapons, people can still find protection in their weapons that they have. No matter what certain citizens view and believe, there are few critical downsides of gun control laws; on the contrary, the laws will provide more protection for the American people, and will ultimately show criminals that this country can stand up for

Read More
1265 Words | 6 Pages

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 (“Second Amendment”). Though times have drastically changed since the second amendment was written, our right to protect ourselves should never change. With that statement, not everyone should be allowed to own a firearm. There are laws and restrictions to protect people from creating terrible situations. These limitations are put in place to allow law-abiding citizens security of their right to protect themselves.

Read More
1235 Words | 5 Pages

This way of thinking is understandable because if we don't get weapons, then how are we supposed to protect ourselves. I also disagree with this because if the laws are more strict then there will be less crime and this will make them not want to do the right thing. Some argue that making gun control laws more strict is not the best way to go. ( Sheldon Richman) argues that gun control is ineffective at preventing crime.

Read More
1506 Words | 7 Pages

But the Second Amendment does not stop the people from fighting it. The argument for gun control is that the kids of the future are dying in our schools that should be safe. Although the defense for the second amendment and the fight against gun control is that the people doing the shooting have problems within themselves. The issues they may have are most commonly mental issues and that's why we need to make sure instead of more gun control just make sure that the people obtaining these weapons do not have such problems, so we could get more people through a screening process to protect our

Read More

More about Should Gun Laws Be Changed Essay

Open Document