Article Summary: The Right To Arms
Theresa Corcoran, Critical Reading
Journal 1: 8/21/12
Bibliographic Information
Abbey, Edward. ”The Right to Arms.” Abbey’s Road. Copyright 1972, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978.
Summary
Guns, should they be outlawed or should outlaws only have guns? In this article “The Right to Arms” by Edward Abbey, explains that weapons have been controlled by other countries besides the United States. A peasant caught with a sword in medieval England would be strung up on a gibbet, they only members of the ruling class to bear arms. The article goes on to say if any of the peasants were to fight they were only allowed to use sickles or clubs. A private citizen known as the “Third Reich”, from Nazi Germany, if one of them had possession of a firearm their statutory penalty was that they would be hung. The Soviet Union would have their citizen beheaded if they were in possession of firearms. It was noted that ownership of firearms in the Soviet Union, are decided upon the monopolies of the state. This meant that they had control of the trade or business. With this being said some of the landowners were authorized to have firearms for the sole purpose for hunting. …show more content…
Abbey does go on to explain that although he is a liberal and very proud of it. He is opposed to the decisions about the restrictions placed in regards to buying, owning or carrying a firearm. Our country is not controlled under dictatorship. Pretty much anyone may purchase a firearm, without having our government dictate or enforce the possession of firearms. If we allow the government to dictate the possession of firearms, the population of firearms would consist of the military and state police with authorized possession. If this happens then Abbey stated he will become one of the
Journal 1: 8/21/12
Bibliographic Information
Abbey, Edward. ”The Right to Arms.” Abbey’s Road. Copyright 1972, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978.
Summary
Guns, should they be outlawed or should outlaws only have guns? In this article “The Right to Arms” by Edward Abbey, explains that weapons have been controlled by other countries besides the United States. A peasant caught with a sword in medieval England would be strung up on a gibbet, they only members of the ruling class to bear arms. The article goes on to say if any of the peasants were to fight they were only allowed to use sickles or clubs. A private citizen known as the “Third Reich”, from Nazi Germany, if one of them had possession of a firearm their statutory penalty was that they would be hung. The Soviet Union would have their citizen beheaded if they were in possession of firearms. It was noted that ownership of firearms in the Soviet Union, are decided upon the monopolies of the state. This meant that they had control of the trade or business. With this being said some of the landowners were authorized to have firearms for the sole purpose for hunting. …show more content…
Abbey does go on to explain that although he is a liberal and very proud of it. He is opposed to the decisions about the restrictions placed in regards to buying, owning or carrying a firearm. Our country is not controlled under dictatorship. Pretty much anyone may purchase a firearm, without having our government dictate or enforce the possession of firearms. If we allow the government to dictate the possession of firearms, the population of firearms would consist of the military and state police with authorized possession. If this happens then Abbey stated he will become one of the