National Rifle Association is a special interest group that lobbies for the rights of gun owners and works to protect the 2nd Amendment. The House Armed Services Committee (Politicians) funds the ATF (Bureaucrats) and provides political support. The NRA works to insure that the 2nd Amendment is never breached.
Passing gun control legislation that creates a universal background check and gun database system as well as passing mental health legislation that improves the health care system’s protocols and policies for assisting people with mental health disorders and that enacts counseling programs in communities and schools will decrease the likelihood of mass shootings in schools. The United States is bitterly divided. Issues of great concern, such as the rise of mass shootings, are partisanized. Both sides of the debate will not comprise or listen to what their opponents have to say. Groups from both sides can only agree that one innocent life taken from gun violence is one too many.
The idea that the Founders wanted to put the citizens on an equal footing as the Government to provide a defence against oppression is also no longer a valid interpretation of the Second Amendment. The United States Federal Government has a vast arsenal of weapons at its disposal including Nuclear weapons, advocates of the Second Amendment would have to advocate for these weapons to be made available to all citizens. It is clear that the second Amendment does not have the same meaning as it did when it was ratified. The founding fathers did not consider the advancements of technology that exist today, or never considered the Amendment as an individual right but rather a group right for a recognised, well-regulated militia. The NRA has lobbied effectively to prevent the control and appropriate regulation of firearms in the United States of America and has taken ownership of the Second Amendment as a Battle cry against Federal Government.
The second amendment states that individual citizen have a constitutionally protected right to own a gun. According to Don Kates (2005), “The Second Amendment guarantees every responsible, law-abiding adult the right to own guns for defense of self, home, and family” (D 11). When the second amendment was written by the founding fathers, their intent was to protect the basic human right of self-defense. They believed that each person has the right to bear arms in defense of themselves, their property, and their family. Furthermore, when ordinary, law-abiding citizens have access to firearms, society is safer and everyone is protected.
I agree with Kleck and feel that gun control organizations definitely have a moral obligation to be honest in their statistics and also take into consideration the opposing side. This issue reminds me on what is happening within our government where democrats and republicans do not simply want to give in to reason. They are so preoccupied with winning instead of having a pro-active approach with discussions to allow problems to be resolved which both sides approve. Instead, these gun organizations seek to cover their actual agenda by stating that they are not actually for the prohibition of guns, but instead want to regulate them.
Were you aware of the, quite frankly horrifying fact that there is an average of one mass shooting per day within the United States of America? Or that, despite the population of America being only approximately 4.2% of the world population, we, as a nation, possess nearly half of the world’s civilian-owned firearms? Firearm-related legislation is almost always controversial, and has been throughout the United States’ past, ever since the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was ratified on 15 December 1791. The Amendment was inspired by William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England, in which he stated that, to paraphrase, the right to bear arms under English law is in reference to the “natural right” of resistance and self-defense against tyranny and oppression. While this may have been considered to be a possibility during that era, there are many reasons why this is not so today.
The second amendment states that the citizens of America have the right to keep, and bear arms; the government is, without a doubt, in violation of this right (Tushnet, Eakins, 2012). By restricting the type of firearms Americans can purchase,
The NRA is the National Rifle Association. They believe that everyone should be allowed to own a firearm because of our rights. Every Time congress tries to pass a gun law the NRA will do everything in their power to stop it. What the NRA does is they give money to people running for congress, but the people running have to agree with the NRA. If they don 't agree then the NRA with take all of their money out and ruin the chances of that person making it.
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. "(www.law.cornell.edu). This document was written in 1775 and ratified in 1787, and from that day the amendment still stands. So, in a constructivist point of view is there still a need for a well regulated militia in the United States or is the second amendment outdated and should be trimmed with the new fabric of America? My personal opinion on the matter is with the new age of America becoming more hostile every day, there will be always a need for a milita.
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
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
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right of the individual to keep and bear firearms. When the Second Amendment was written it was for the right to arm oneself as a personal liberty to deter undemocratic or oppressive governing bodies from forming and to repel impending invasions. Furthermore, gun advocates proclaim that guns are for the right to self-defense. Some people try to participate and uphold the law. We have seen how guns in the hands of children can cause fatal accidents and people have committed mindless crimes leading to
"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. ", states the Second Amendment. Guns should not be illegal because it is the people who don’t follow the laws that are committing crimes with guns. Guns are a source of protection. We use these guns to keep criminals out of our homes.
Weapons are used excessively all over the world. Many people say that making gun owning legal is a bad thing concerning politics, the economy and social life in general. Making a gun owning legal is not a good idea because it leads to crimes and violence between people and specially politicians, for example for example if someone doesn’t like one of the politicians he will find it easy to kill or to attack when he owns a gun. So politics will be affected badly. Gun owning should not be legal because it will damage the economic statue in the country, with owning a gun legally and daily will make people more violent and aggressive that can commit a crime easily so the tourists for example who are the main source of the economy will get
"’Make no mistake -- they 're coming for our guns. And we freedom-loving gun lovers are totally defenseless! Other than, you know, the guns’ -Stephen Colbert” (Kurtzman 1). There are as many people who advocate for pro gun laws as the people who are opposed, which is the reason why gun control has become one of the most controversial topics as of right now. America is truly split between those who advocate for gun control and those who are opposed.
