The legislation was unnecessary because, again, no problem existed. How to cite The Right to Bear Arms essay Choose cite format: APA MLA Harvard Chicago ASA IEEE AMA. While that has previously been a self-correcting phenomenon, the reality is that, without the threat of being controlled by the citizenry in faster and more meaningful way than the ballot-box, even the American form of government could quickly devolve into tyranny, making it right to bear arms essay, once again, for patriots to take up arms and defend themselves and their country. The third misconception is that anyone can get a license and carry a gun. Burger presents solid evidence supporting both arguments on the issue of gun control in his essay, "The Right to Bear Arms", right to bear arms essay. As the second amendment states "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Type a new keyword(s) and press Enter to search
The framers did not mention police departments or other local governmental units, which has led to some misconceptions about the right of people to arm themselves when protected by municipal government agencies. However, this is because municipal police forces, as they currently exist, did not exist at the time of the Revolutionary War. The closest approximation was a standing army or militia, and the concerns about the citizenry failing to arm themselves in that scenario were made clear in the debates and documents leading up to the ratification of the Constitution. Modern Views on Gun Control However, some time people ratification of the Constitution and modern times, the issue of gun control became one that divided people along ideological lines, right to bear arms essay, rather than one about which people were united.
States in America are frequently referred to as either red or blue, with red states representing Republican strongholds and blue states representing Democrat strongholds: Conservative red America has been described as religiousmoralistic, patriotic, white, masculineand less educated. Liberal right to bear arms essay America has been depicted as secular, relativistic, internationalist, multicultural, feminine, and college educated. Reds are seen as supporting guns, the death penaltyand the Iraq Right to bear arms essay, blues as supporting abortion and the environment. Chapter 4, p. While these are stereotypes that do not define all voters in either political block, the reality is that the issue of gun control has become a hot-button political issue.
Why is Gun Control a Major Issue When one looks at the number of violent crimes where guns are involved, it seems reasonable to suggest that gun control would be a major issue in right to bear arms essay United States. It is certainly true that gun crime is higher in the United States than in countries where the citizens do not have access to weapons, right to bear arms essay. It is also certainly true that when a firearm is involved a crime can go from merely violent to deadly in a matter of moments. Incidents like the horrible Columbine High School massacre help demonstrate the fact that, once guns are involved in a violent situation, the violence can rapidly escalate. However, the reality is that far more Americans are killed in automobile accidents each year than by gun fire, and yet no one is suggesting that people outlaw automobiles.
One reason that gun control might be such a highly-discussed issue is that the media has a slightly left-leaning bias, which is not surprising given that journalists are generally highly-educated, and more highly-educated people tend to lean towards the left. Therefore, the media portrayal of the number of people who do not support gun control may be inadequate, right to bear arms essay. There may also be a bias towards depicting those who support the right to bear arms as gun nuts right to bear arms essay fans of violence. It is certainly the case that mainstream journalists fail to describe the patriotic history behind the Second Amendment when discussing gun control issues, leaving members of the public with the impression that the right is antiquated because people are no longer required to hunt for their food and have adequate protection from local law enforcement agencies.
In fact, even the textbook attempts to mislead people about the In Chapter 14, the textbook addresses the right to bear arms, and argues that those in favor of the right to bear arms fail to address the fact that the Second Amendment links that right to a well-ordered militia. In fact, the textbook explicitly provides that: Right to bear arms essay language [of the Second Amendment] links the right to bear arms with the security of the state. The language suggests that the right belongs to each state or, if to individuals, only to individuals when they are protecting their state- that is, when they are serving in the militia of their state. Chapter 14, p. Anyone who understands the Federalist discussions of the right to bear arms knows that position is an absolute misrepresentation of the founder's intent with the Second Amendment.
The founding fathers feared a standing army and wanted to assure individual citizens that they would have the right to self-protection, which should not be abridged even if the country develops a standing army. Moreover, when one views the Bill of Rights as a whole, one sees a document that is concerned with individual rights, not state's rights, so it seems ludicrous to suggest that the Second Amendment would right to bear arms essay to a state's right to maintain a militia. Both of those facts are made perfectly clear when one reads the Federalist Papers.
Moreover, while the textbook acknowledges that a more expansive interpretation may allow individuals the right to use arms to protect themselves, it suggests that people would not be guaranteed the right to bear arms for hunting or any purpose other than self-defense. However, when one looks at how Britain curtailed individual liberties The Role of the National Rifle Association NRA Because the majority of Americans have come to support gun control, possibly due to ignorance of the historical basis for the right to bear arms, it has become necessary for interest groups to lobby to protect that right. The NRA is a single-issue group with the goal of opposing gun control.
The NRA helped defeat Al Gore's bid for presidency by mobilizing people in swing-states. Their support for President Bush was repaid; the Bush Administration filed two briefs with the Supreme Court opposing gun control, which reversed approximately 60 years of Executive Department policy on the issue. Chapter 6, p. The NRA has successfully lobbied to keep gun-crime victims from being able to sue the manufacturers or dealers of those weapons. In addition, the NRA successfully lobbied to end the ban on owning automatic or assault weapons. Conclusion Violent crime is horrible, and, when guns are involved, is likely to be more severe or deadlier than when other weapons are involved. However, the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights are not there to promote a safer or tidier America, but to promote liberty.
If one curtailed freedom of the press, it would reduce the amount of civil unrest. If one denied criminal defendants their rights under the Fourth, right to bear arms essay, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments, it would lead to a greater number of convictions and a reduction in criminal activity by those defendants. However, the concept of American liberty is that life is meaningless without freedom. Yes, gun control efforts might save lives, but the reality is that if American citizens gave up their right to bear arms, most especially those weapons that right to bear arms essay match those used by the U. armed forcesright to bear arms essay, then they would give up their ability to defend themselves if the government became tyrannical.
In the short history of the United States, there have been several times when the government has ignored the Constitution, to the detriment of its citizens. While that has previously been a self-correcting phenomenon, the reality is that, without the threat of being controlled by the citizenry in faster and more meaningful way than the ballot-box, even the American form of government could quickly devolve into tyranny, making it necessary, once again, for patriots to take up arms and defend themselves and their country. Works Cited Hamilton, Alexander. Hamilton, Alexander. Hardy, David, right to bear arms essay.
The American Revolution. Twin Cities Public Television. Public Television. Those groups opposed to the private ownership of firearms should base their arguments on their own personal beliefs rather than a Constitutional interpretation defense. As supported by its historical background and analysis of Constitutional context and meaning, "A well. In asserting that the right to bear arms must be interpreted in the collectivist point-of-view, right to bear arms essay, the author rationalized that "the more collectively the right is interpreted, the more broadly Congress can legislate to restrict the right to bear arms" In effect, what made sense in Busch's analysis is that this particular right, as stated in the Constitution, must be interpreted in the proper context.
Thus, Emerson's ownership of. The first argument would be to point out that essentially, the right to bear arms is an individual right that can be exercised by any member of the civil society. The second main argument to be pointed out is that gun ownership does not necessarily translate to its improper use, posing as. The bill did not pass, but eventually a compromise bill went through requiring all handguns to have at least 3. No completely plastic gun has ever been produced, although guns with a plastic frame are popular because they weigh less. The legislation was unnecessary because, again, no problem existed, right to bear arms essay. Apparently, the gun debate is not the place to look for facts. One similarity that communities with high rates of burglaries share is the fact that these communities right to bear arms essay "restrictive gun laws," which proves that indeed, gun control acts more as a detriment rather than a support to.
Right to Carry Handguns for Self-Protection: The right to carry handguns for law abiding citizens has been a continual social and political debate about the restriction or availability of firearms within the country. Actually, the right to carry handguns has developed to become one of the major controversial and intractable issues within the social and political environments in the nation. The main reason attributed to the development of this controversial issue. Learning Tools Study Documents Writing Guides About us FAQs Our Blog Citation Generator Flash Card Generator Login SignUp.
Download this Thesis in word format. Excerpt from Thesis : The framers did not mention police departments or other local governmental units, which has led to some misconceptions about the right of people to arm themselves when protected by municipal government agencies. In fact, even the textbook attempts to right to bear arms essay people about the. Read Full Thesis. Right to Bear Arms - Words: Right to bear arms essay 5 Pages Topic: Law - Constitutional Law Paper : Right to Bear Arms Should Words: Length: 2 Pages Topic: Law - Constitutional Law Paper : Right to Bear Arms Arguing Words: Length: 1 Pages Topic: Law - Constitutional Law Paper : Right to Bear Arms Gun Words: Length: 9 Pages Topic: Law - Constitutional Law Paper : Right to Bear Arms the Words: Length: 2 Pages Topic: Law - Constitutional Law Paper : Right to Right to bear arms essay Handguns for Self-Protection: The Words: Length: 8 Pages Topic: Law - Constitutional Law Paper :
three wishes essay
In this way the first two models concentrate on the intention of the Amendment, on its preamble. Such an approach is widely criticized. This is a individual-rights model. The matter is, the USA has case law, and therefore the interpretation of the Constitution can change from case to case. Thus, the case District of Columbia v. As Thomas B. McAffee and Michael J. In particular, disagreements arise on the ground of terms. And in any way both words have left the context of military service and received outer, civic usage. At the end of the 20 th century it has become wide-spread to explain the terms of keeping and bearing arms as such referring to private arms intended for self-defense against crime or hunting sphere. On the whole, the question of the right of bearing arms with the purpose of self defense has been discussed for ages in various philosophical, political and social writings including such writers as Aristotle in Greece, Cicero in Rome, Machiavelli, John Locke etc.
Today, the two camps are the opponents and the proponents of gun control. From the most points of view, this right can be associated with the right for self-defense. The latter can be regarded either as one of the fundamental and inalienable rights of a human being or as a privilege of a free citizen in a free state. It is often claimed that when citizens have the right to keep and bear arms, they are able to keep their state subservient to them. They are the masters and the state is a servant, as it is in ideal democratic state. In Australia, it is testified, public safety has essentially decreased after intensified gun control. Further on, the opponents of gun control often appeal to the experience of totalitarian regimes as a strong argument. As it has been already mentioned above, totalitarian states have a standard doctrine for registration of all the weapons and forbidding it for common citizens.
In Nazi Germany some regulations were relaxed, as compared to those of the Weimar Republic; all the weapons were exempted from regulation except handguns, the range of individuals exempted from acquiring the permission was extended, and the age for acquisition of firearms was decreased from 20 to Meanwhile all the Jews were prohibited from manufacturing the ammunition and firearms. In fact, there has been special research conducted by Martin Killias in 21 countries of the world as for the gun control. Much data has been collected, but in reality no true evidence for any causality has been provided.
One of the provoking areas is studying of suicide statistics. One the one hand, it is supposed that the more weapons are possessed by common citizens, the higher is the rate of firearm suicide in the state. All in all, gun laws do not have any essential effects on suicide statistics. Then, Gary Cleck, a criminologist from Florida State University, also conducted a study and found out that victims of crimes are less likely to be injured or loose their property when they have firearms to protect themselves Kleck, On the other hand, with the guns they typically get into more dangerous situation as using a gun for self-protection can provoke the criminal to attack.
Violent crimes are merely affected by gun laws as well. The other problem is of economic character. It goes without saying that for gun manufacturers it is profitable to have as much clients as possible. Interestingly, John Lott, the economist and the author of the book More Guns, Less Crime justifies permission for law-abiding citizens not only to keep or possess guns, but also to carry them in public places. All points considered, it seems to be right to defend reasonable regulation in any way, because no right can be absolute and unconditional. It is sound to issue permissions for law-abiding citizens after they are checked for mental stability, absence of criminal past and going through special training.
The NRA is a single-issue group with the goal of opposing gun control. The NRA helped defeat Al Gore's bid for presidency by mobilizing people in swing-states. Their support for President Bush was repaid; the Bush Administration filed two briefs with the Supreme Court opposing gun control, which reversed approximately 60 years of Executive Department policy on the issue. Chapter 6, p. The NRA has successfully lobbied to keep gun-crime victims from being able to sue the manufacturers or dealers of those weapons. In addition, the NRA successfully lobbied to end the ban on owning automatic or assault weapons.
Conclusion Violent crime is horrible, and, when guns are involved, is likely to be more severe or deadlier than when other weapons are involved. However, the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights are not there to promote a safer or tidier America, but to promote liberty. If one curtailed freedom of the press, it would reduce the amount of civil unrest. If one denied criminal defendants their rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments, it would lead to a greater number of convictions and a reduction in criminal activity by those defendants. However, the concept of American liberty is that life is meaningless without freedom. Yes, gun control efforts might save lives, but the reality is that if American citizens gave up their right to bear arms, most especially those weapons that could match those used by the U.
armed forces , then they would give up their ability to defend themselves if the government became tyrannical. In the short history of the United States, there have been several times when the government has ignored the Constitution, to the detriment of its citizens. While that has previously been a self-correcting phenomenon, the reality is that, without the threat of being controlled by the citizenry in faster and more meaningful way than the ballot-box, even the American form of government could quickly devolve into tyranny, making it necessary, once again, for patriots to take up arms and defend themselves and their country.
Works Cited Hamilton, Alexander. Hamilton, Alexander. Hardy, David. The American Revolution. Twin Cities Public Television. Public Television. Those groups opposed to the private ownership of firearms should base their arguments on their own personal beliefs rather than a Constitutional interpretation defense. As supported by its historical background and analysis of Constitutional context and meaning, "A well. In asserting that the right to bear arms must be interpreted in the collectivist point-of-view, the author rationalized that "the more collectively the right is interpreted, the more broadly Congress can legislate to restrict the right to bear arms" In effect, what made sense in Busch's analysis is that this particular right, as stated in the Constitution, must be interpreted in the proper context.
Thus, Emerson's ownership of. The first argument would be to point out that essentially, the right to bear arms is an individual right that can be exercised by any member of the civil society. The second main argument to be pointed out is that gun ownership does not necessarily translate to its improper use, posing as. The bill did not pass, but eventually a compromise bill went through requiring all handguns to have at least 3. No completely plastic gun has ever been produced, although guns with a plastic frame are popular because they weigh less. The legislation was unnecessary because, again, no problem existed. Apparently, the gun debate is not the place to look for facts. One similarity that communities with high rates of burglaries share is the fact that these communities have "restrictive gun laws," which proves that indeed, gun control acts more as a detriment rather than a support to.
Right to Carry Handguns for Self-Protection: The right to carry handguns for law abiding citizens has been a continual social and political debate about the restriction or availability of firearms within the country. Actually, the right to carry handguns has developed to become one of the major controversial and intractable issues within the social and political environments in the nation. The main reason attributed to the development of this controversial issue. Learning Tools Study Documents Writing Guides About us FAQs Our Blog Citation Generator Flash Card Generator Login SignUp. Download this Thesis in word format.
No comments:
Post a Comment