The Bill of Rights and Gun Control
As time has gone on, the Second Amendment has become the subject of many heated debates. The Second Amendments states, “...the rights of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”. However, with a rise in the U.S. crime levels, many people have talked about bills that would restrict gun ownership. Opposers of these bills say that they are direct violations of their Second Amendment rights, while supporters of them say that restricting guns would help bring down the crime levels. Below are three common arguments and their counter-arguments, made by both sides. Those arguments are about burglary, their constitutional rights, and whether or not gun control would actually be effective. First, …show more content…
The first argument that opposers of gun control bring up is that guns are a way to protect yourself and your family during a burglary or break-in. Emergencies like break-ins occur in the United States every eighteen seconds, and, according to a survey by the U.S. Department of Justice, there is a household member home during 28% of those burglaries. 7% of those people experienced violent crime during the burglary, which is why Gun Rights Advocates think having a gun in the house is an essential part of security during a burglary. They believe that they should have access to guns in case of an emergency that would put their family in danger. The second argument brought up by Gun Rights Advocates is that gun control is an attack on their Second Amendment rights. They don’t believe that they should have to jump through hoops to get guns because it is a Constitutional rights given to the people. What if the government becomes tyrannical over restrictions? The third common argument brought up by Gun Rights Advocates is that making guns harder to acquire legally is not going to have an effect on the criminals that already disregard the laws. If criminals are so intent on breaking the laws by using gun violence, then surely they won’t be afraid to acquire guns through illegal methods. Why couldn’t they just steal someone else’s
As time has gone on, the Second Amendment has become the subject of many heated debates. The Second Amendments states, “...the rights of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”. However, with a rise in the U.S. crime levels, many people have talked about bills that would restrict gun ownership. Opposers of these bills say that they are direct violations of their Second Amendment rights, while supporters of them say that restricting guns would help bring down the crime levels. Below are three common arguments and their counter-arguments, made by both sides. Those arguments are about burglary, their constitutional rights, and whether or not gun control would actually be effective. First, …show more content…
The first argument that opposers of gun control bring up is that guns are a way to protect yourself and your family during a burglary or break-in. Emergencies like break-ins occur in the United States every eighteen seconds, and, according to a survey by the U.S. Department of Justice, there is a household member home during 28% of those burglaries. 7% of those people experienced violent crime during the burglary, which is why Gun Rights Advocates think having a gun in the house is an essential part of security during a burglary. They believe that they should have access to guns in case of an emergency that would put their family in danger. The second argument brought up by Gun Rights Advocates is that gun control is an attack on their Second Amendment rights. They don’t believe that they should have to jump through hoops to get guns because it is a Constitutional rights given to the people. What if the government becomes tyrannical over restrictions? The third common argument brought up by Gun Rights Advocates is that making guns harder to acquire legally is not going to have an effect on the criminals that already disregard the laws. If criminals are so intent on breaking the laws by using gun violence, then surely they won’t be afraid to acquire guns through illegal methods. Why couldn’t they just steal someone else’s