Gun Control Arguments
on assault rifles is unconstitutional. Joseph Sobran, an American journalist and writer analyzes the amendment: "The Second Amendment, whatever else it means, clearly forbids the federal government to ‘infringe’ that right” (par. 8). The federal government has taken away that right by limiting assault rifles. First, nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government granted to right to limit an individual’s right to own firearms. On the contrary, the Second Amendment expressly grants this right to all citizens, making all gun control laws unconstitutional. James Madison said in No. 45 of The Federalist Papers, "The powers of the federal government were to be ‘few and defined.’ The supposed federal power to regulate guns is anything but ‘defined’;
…show more content…
They believe the laws that are in place are effective and need to become stricter. “To date, this system [Brady Bill] has prevented more than 200,000 gun purchases by people who had been in mental institutions, been dishonorably discharged from military service, were fugitives, or had a history of domestic abuse" (“Gun control,” World of Health, par. 35). For this reason, opponents argue that more and stricter gun control laws will result in less gun violence. It may be true that gun control laws help reduce gun violence. However, more and stricter gun control laws will reduce one’s Second Amendment rights. “...gun advocates favor freedom, choice and self-responsibility. If someone wishes to be prepared to defend himself, he should be free to do so. No one has the right to deprive others of the means of effective self-defense such as a handgun" (Stossel, par. 3). Not only would more and stricter gun control laws be unconstitutional, they would also be just as ineffective as the ones in place already. It is impossible to stop every single criminal from getting a gun. Gun control advocates often ignore that guns can save lives. “Today there are more than 300 million legally owned guns in America, and there were roughly 350,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2011. In other words, the number of legal guns in private hands went up by a third, while the number of firearm-related crimes dropped by 74 percent." (Domenech, par. 24). The only thing that will stop gun violence is another person with a gun. More gun control laws are not the answer because criminals do not follow the laws that are in place
They believe the laws that are in place are effective and need to become stricter. “To date, this system [Brady Bill] has prevented more than 200,000 gun purchases by people who had been in mental institutions, been dishonorably discharged from military service, were fugitives, or had a history of domestic abuse" (“Gun control,” World of Health, par. 35). For this reason, opponents argue that more and stricter gun control laws will result in less gun violence. It may be true that gun control laws help reduce gun violence. However, more and stricter gun control laws will reduce one’s Second Amendment rights. “...gun advocates favor freedom, choice and self-responsibility. If someone wishes to be prepared to defend himself, he should be free to do so. No one has the right to deprive others of the means of effective self-defense such as a handgun" (Stossel, par. 3). Not only would more and stricter gun control laws be unconstitutional, they would also be just as ineffective as the ones in place already. It is impossible to stop every single criminal from getting a gun. Gun control advocates often ignore that guns can save lives. “Today there are more than 300 million legally owned guns in America, and there were roughly 350,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2011. In other words, the number of legal guns in private hands went up by a third, while the number of firearm-related crimes dropped by 74 percent." (Domenech, par. 24). The only thing that will stop gun violence is another person with a gun. More gun control laws are not the answer because criminals do not follow the laws that are in place