"It has become impossible to give up the enterprise of disarmament with abandoning the whole great adventure of building a connective peace system."-Arthur Henderson. In the United States, the people have always been given the right to bear arms and the law protects that right for them. America needs to see the positive and negative effects of disarmament. Disarmament can bring more reliability on our safety such as less murders, robberies, and crimes. It could also be the downfall of our protection in a situation of assault. While disarmament can bring safety it also brings no protection. Since there is no guaranteed protection, the world seems to need more weapons. As the world becomes more violent concerning nuclear weapons, terrorist attacks,
…show more content…
For example, a program called DDR has been able to help us control our guns, and they have decided to help by "[reducing] the size of armed forces while reestablishing a monopoly over the use of force by the government" (Berdal, Mats 2). The DDR has found a great way to control the weapons and has the right limitations to set over the people for our safety. Reducing the weapons to some extent will greatly satisfy both sides of the argument because the guns aren 't entirely staying or leaving. However, taking away guns can give us loss of protection and loss of our ability to defend ourselves. The best way the government can do this is by "securing communities before commencing disarmament" (Denny, Christian 11). Since there is no protection, there is no reason to disarm the communities if they aren 't secure first. Safety is number one and taking a gun privilege away will decrease the safety in our communities unless the government makes sure we are secure. Systems are needed to control our society so that unwanted deaths and crimes do not occur in our communities. Systems such as the "DDR [have] proved to vital to stability" (Berdal, Mats 2). With gun-ownership comes responsibility. DDR has secured the fact that guns do kill people and if it falls in the wrong hands then it can cause problems in our …show more content…
It is certain that problems come when people become disarmed. Most of these have been "disarmed officers and soldiers [that] have been involved in a series of incidents this year alone"(Denny, Christian 7). Many of these have experienced loss of protection ad have lost their ability to defend themselves because they don 't have a weapon. Guns are a crucial factor in our society today and it is very well needed in this violent world. There have been "more than 79,000 fighters... at least seven percent experienced severe problems(Berdal, Mats 3). The disarming of armed forces have caused some of these people to die because they had no protection. No protection means no safety which will eventually lead to issues with some individuals. Bearing arms has been part of our constitution for centuries and there are more people who use weapons in our society than we think. According to Denny, "more than 80,000 people are believed to being in armed groups(Denny, Christian 8). All of these people have used their weapons for protection, and disarming them just leads to an increased number of deaths. E world has become more violent over the past 40 years. There is no need for problems to occur in our society. Disarmament should only occur when there is only a guaranteed protection after they have been
For example, a program called DDR has been able to help us control our guns, and they have decided to help by "[reducing] the size of armed forces while reestablishing a monopoly over the use of force by the government" (Berdal, Mats 2). The DDR has found a great way to control the weapons and has the right limitations to set over the people for our safety. Reducing the weapons to some extent will greatly satisfy both sides of the argument because the guns aren 't entirely staying or leaving. However, taking away guns can give us loss of protection and loss of our ability to defend ourselves. The best way the government can do this is by "securing communities before commencing disarmament" (Denny, Christian 11). Since there is no protection, there is no reason to disarm the communities if they aren 't secure first. Safety is number one and taking a gun privilege away will decrease the safety in our communities unless the government makes sure we are secure. Systems are needed to control our society so that unwanted deaths and crimes do not occur in our communities. Systems such as the "DDR [have] proved to vital to stability" (Berdal, Mats 2). With gun-ownership comes responsibility. DDR has secured the fact that guns do kill people and if it falls in the wrong hands then it can cause problems in our …show more content…
It is certain that problems come when people become disarmed. Most of these have been "disarmed officers and soldiers [that] have been involved in a series of incidents this year alone"(Denny, Christian 7). Many of these have experienced loss of protection ad have lost their ability to defend themselves because they don 't have a weapon. Guns are a crucial factor in our society today and it is very well needed in this violent world. There have been "more than 79,000 fighters... at least seven percent experienced severe problems(Berdal, Mats 3). The disarming of armed forces have caused some of these people to die because they had no protection. No protection means no safety which will eventually lead to issues with some individuals. Bearing arms has been part of our constitution for centuries and there are more people who use weapons in our society than we think. According to Denny, "more than 80,000 people are believed to being in armed groups(Denny, Christian 8). All of these people have used their weapons for protection, and disarming them just leads to an increased number of deaths. E world has become more violent over the past 40 years. There is no need for problems to occur in our society. Disarmament should only occur when there is only a guaranteed protection after they have been