Pros And Cons Of Arguments Against Gun Control
3rd hour
Debate Arguments
Against Gun Control: 3rd Argument It is quite clear that by looking at criminals intentions and the overall protection of our country's people gun control should not be administered. Since the establishment of our great nation guns have played a central role and have been of great importance. Though some may think that guns are weapons of war, crime, and violence our Founding Fathers realized they were an essential right that needed to be preserved for the citizens. In the Bill of Rights the Second Amendment of the 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." Gun control proponents have …show more content…
made their arguments clear in interpreting the Constitution. They have found most of their support in the fact that some federal courts have ruled that the Second Amendment applies to only those serving in militias. This refers to those now in the National Guard and or state militias. But what happens to those trying to protect themselves who aren't a part of the militia? Isn't the point of having guns to protect the individuals of this fine nation?
Those against gun control believe in these private protections. The Framers weren't able to predict everything the future would hold including the rapid growth in crime and violence. James Madison, who wrote the Constitution believed in the freedom and liberty of the individual, he discusses the advantages the private individual in America contained at the time with the right to bear arms compared to the many individuals of the nations in Europe. With the increase in violence and crime within the United States today the beliefs of James Madison and the framers become even stronger. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) the court recognizes that the government can regulate gun rights but that the Second Amendment does establish an individual right to bear arms. The Court said its decision should not be interpreted to question the right of government to: prohibit felons and the mentally ill from owning weapons, prohibit guns in schools or public buildings, ban certain categories of guns not commonly used for self-defense, and to establish certain other conditions on gun ownership. Thus, the Washington D.C. gun ban was overturned just as many other cities have done since then. If we eliminate this right to bear arms then we
are also eliminating the safety of our nation as a whole for future generarations. http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/beararms.htm
Debate Arguments
Against Gun Control: 3rd Argument It is quite clear that by looking at criminals intentions and the overall protection of our country's people gun control should not be administered. Since the establishment of our great nation guns have played a central role and have been of great importance. Though some may think that guns are weapons of war, crime, and violence our Founding Fathers realized they were an essential right that needed to be preserved for the citizens. In the Bill of Rights the Second Amendment of the 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." Gun control proponents have …show more content…
made their arguments clear in interpreting the Constitution. They have found most of their support in the fact that some federal courts have ruled that the Second Amendment applies to only those serving in militias. This refers to those now in the National Guard and or state militias. But what happens to those trying to protect themselves who aren't a part of the militia? Isn't the point of having guns to protect the individuals of this fine nation?
Those against gun control believe in these private protections. The Framers weren't able to predict everything the future would hold including the rapid growth in crime and violence. James Madison, who wrote the Constitution believed in the freedom and liberty of the individual, he discusses the advantages the private individual in America contained at the time with the right to bear arms compared to the many individuals of the nations in Europe. With the increase in violence and crime within the United States today the beliefs of James Madison and the framers become even stronger. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) the court recognizes that the government can regulate gun rights but that the Second Amendment does establish an individual right to bear arms. The Court said its decision should not be interpreted to question the right of government to: prohibit felons and the mentally ill from owning weapons, prohibit guns in schools or public buildings, ban certain categories of guns not commonly used for self-defense, and to establish certain other conditions on gun ownership. Thus, the Washington D.C. gun ban was overturned just as many other cities have done since then. If we eliminate this right to bear arms then we
are also eliminating the safety of our nation as a whole for future generarations. http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/beararms.htm