Grassley Cruz Legislation: Lewis V. United States 1980

Improved Essays
Grassley Cruz Legislation
The Grassley Cruz Legislation is a bill that aims to achieve a variety of gun control issues in order to allow for greater safety from guns. The attempt to better gun safety is to first increase resources and tools for prosecuting criminals of these crimes. It is able to achieve this be criminalizing straw purchases of weapons along with adding additional penalties and qualifications for trafficking guns. The bill also aims to increase school safety. It does this by providing grants that will increase resources for schools to add security in order to help protect schools, this will be provided in the Secure Our school grants. The Bill additionally aims to address the issue of the mentally ill acquiring guns. First, it will give states incentives to provide mental health records to a federal database. It will also clarify what information is necessary and penalties will be imposed on upon states who fail to agree with this. This will increase the knowledge of people who are of mental disorders, who will not be sold guns, in order to protect them from others and themselves. Finally, it does not attempt to undermine the second amendment and includes a variety of pro-gun provisions. It does this by allowing for
…show more content…
United States 1980. This was a ruling that allows congress to restrict firearms to a certain group of people, in this case the group being restricted was convicted felons. Another landmark case was Distict of Columbia vs Heller in which the courts ruled that the second amendment guarantees an individual’s right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia. In addition, that this firearm can constitutionally be used as self-defense. Therefore, the court has ruled that the second amendment must be upheld allowing people to own certain types of guns, however, congress is capable of restricting this

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    The Second Amendment- The second amendment has been at times the cornerstone of political controversies or arguments throughout the decades due to what many would construe as an open ended interpretation by the founding fathers on the right of an American to own a firearm. The first and in many cases major line of ‘defense’ (no pun intended) for gun advocates, stating the original ideology of the founding fathers and those who founded this nation was a nation based on the freedom to bear arms for ones self interests. The amendment states “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” , and many feel as though the key words are ‘shall not be…

    • 507 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The court case, “District of Columbia vs. Heller” was a lawsuit filed against the District of Columbia for supposedly, infringing upon the rights protected by the second amendment. The suit was filed by Dick Heller, a police officer in Washington, DC. In an attempt to lower the crime rates, DC placed a ban on all handguns. The chief of police was allowed to give licenses to own handguns for a year, but denied most applicants. After heller and several others were denied, they brought the issue up to the local district court, which ruled in favor of the ban.…

    • 614 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In 2008, after the Court had decided Heller and said that the Second Amendment includes an individual right to keep and bear arms, Otis McDonald and other Chicago residents sued the city for violating the Constitution. They claimed that Chicago’s handgun regulations violate their 14th Amendment rights. Specifically, the residents argue that the 14th Amendment makes the Second Amendment right “to keep and bear Arms” applicable to state and local governments. The federal district court ruled for Chicago and McDonald appealed. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals decided for Chicago, as well.…

    • 586 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Interpreting the Second Amendment In the Bill of Rights, the citizens are given the privilege to own firearms for their personal protection. However, the Second Amendment seemed to take away this right by adding the concept of “organized militia.” In Columbia v. Heller, the court held that individuals could possess firearms without having to be the members of a militia. However, judge Stevens gave a dissent stating that all judgments should be made with the direction of past cases and court decisions. His main argument came from the fact that gun control laws had not been made unconstitutional.…

    • 1417 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Bear Arms Dbq

    • 703 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Due to the human nature of self-defense, sport, and surviving, the second amendment will always remain relevant in society. Although there are many regulations as to who can own a gun, where they are allowed, and requiring a permit to carry and concealed weapon, the second amendment still protects and grants the right of the militia and citizens to “keep and bear arms”. In order to ensure that the government couldn’t take away the citizens firearms, the founding fathers preserved their right to self-defense with the ratification of the second amendment on December 15, 1791. In today's society, Americans are still trying to defend their right to bear arms.…

    • 703 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Second Amendment Cons

    • 444 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Dick Heller, a D.C. police officer, was permitted to carry a weapon while he was on duty, yet he was denied a one-year license to ownership of a concealed handgun in his own home. Shortly after this disapproval, he sued the District of Columbia. The Second Amendment states that U.S. citizens have the right to keep firearms in the home for the purpose of self-defense, yet the District of Columbia’s requires that firearms which are kept in the home must be nonfunctional. This requirement contradicted those rights. On June 26th, 2008, the Supreme Court ruled a 5-4 decision which stated that a ban on registering handguns and establishing requirements to keep guns in the home disassembled or nonfunctional did indeed violate the Second Amendment.…

    • 444 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Heller. In this case, the problem was that after the District of Columbia passed legislation including the registration of handguns, requiring licenses for pistols, and stating that all legal firearms must be kept unloaded and the trigger locked, a group people said that it took away their Second Amendment right. The people that disagreed with them were private gun owners. The federal trial court said that the Second Amendment only applied to militias and not private gun owners. I think that everyone should be allowed to have firearms because they are good for…

    • 691 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Persuasive Essay On Texas

    • 363 Words
    • 2 Pages

    This law will put guns into the wrong hands that don’t know how and when to use a weapon properly. They state that they will keep guns out of denied hands, however, there are no licenses that prove they are not allowed to carry a weapon. I am all for restricting gun laws and putting guns in the right hands. I believe that will reduce crime; however, putting guns into the wrong hands can end up becoming very…

    • 363 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In 2008 the preeminent court drove a 5-4 choice that "the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution applies to government enclaves and secures an individual's entitlement to have a gun for customarily legal purposes, for example, self-protection inside one's home." So the elucidation in which singular rights perusing of the Second Amendment is one upheld by D.C. versus Heller because of the state prohibition on weapons which is illegal. This does not have any significant bearing to all individuals in the country, weapon proprietorship rights are accommodated everything except not guests to the province having a non-outsider visa in many causes.…

    • 102 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This proves that people in the United States need to go into a more mental health checkup before they can go out and purchase a weapon. Others say that they do not need to go under investigation before purchasing a weapon because they know how to own and operate their weapon in a responsible manner. Another way to help with the gun violence in America is to " insist on mandatory training and licensing along with safe-and secure gun storage" ("Gun Violence").This is saying that people have to have training and a licensing before they can own a weapon. The people will have to have a safety training and licensing before owning a weapon. The cities can also take a stand by "supporting city wide planning…

    • 1266 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Gun Control Proposal

    • 1368 Words
    • 6 Pages

    A Proposal for Handguns Should Be Controlled In Arizona Problem The problem is Arizona allows people who are over 21 years old to buy and use handguns, which makes many people believe they are always under a dangerous environment of gun violence, especially children, women, and older people. From the statistics of gun violence in America, there are many results of surveys that show how serious gun violence in Arizona is, like how the rate of Arizona’s gun-death ratio is 40 percent higher than the U.S. average. The Law Center to prevent Gun Violence gave Arizona an “F,” ranking it 49th out if 50 states, even Arizona had the eighth-highest rate of women killed by men and so on (Center for American Progress, pp. 1).…

    • 1368 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    One of the most controversial Amendments today is the ‘Right to Bear Arms.’ As I get older, I see life a lot more differently and how the Amendments can either be used in our favor as Americans or hurt us. To be more clear, the ‘Right to Bear Arms’ is the second Amendment of the United States Constitution passed by Congress September 25, 1789. Ratified December 15, 1791, the first 10 amendments form the Bill of Right. It is a well regulated Militia; being necessary to the security of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.…

    • 1015 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This means that if somehow possessing a handgun negatively affects interstate commerce, then congress can pass a law which enacts some sort of law on handguns, that in turn protects interstate commerce. The question that arises here is to what extent congress will go to argue that guns do affect interstate commerce, as seen in the court case United States Vs. Lopez. Clearly there are several sides and interpretations to the Constitution and how it should be applied to gun control…

    • 942 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It is very clear and stated soundly, that the right to bear arms by the people shall not be infringed upon. Therefore, this paper establishes that gun ownership is indeed an inherent right. The application of gun control measures by the courts, therefore, should be based not only on the first clause of the text of the Second Amendment, but on both clauses, which are separately interpreted. Therefore the decision by certain courts to determine that civilians vacate the right to own guns independent of the state is unfounded and…

    • 996 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Guns are constitutionally guaranteed to law-abiding citizens, under the right to “keep and bear Arms, [which] shall not be infringed” (2nd amendment). You introduced the S.150 Bill, in 2013, to ban assault weapons, “to ensure that the right to bear arms is not unlimited” (GOP 2013), but it does go against our constitutional rights. My family are responsible gun owners, under their 2nd amendment rights. By you trying to completely ban guns and further support the ideal on gun control, you are going against their rights. My cousin, currently lives in North Carolina, and has a gun permit due to high crime rates of home invasions.…

    • 962 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays