Shall not be infringed
“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” (“The Bill of Rights: A Transcription”); this is a quote from the bill of rights that explains the right of all US citizens to own firearms. There is a reason that the bill of rights was created, and to talk about stripping anyone of something listed in the bill of rights is ridiculous. Should the government also do away with freedom of speech because it is dangerous to national security? The obvious answer is no; Citizens need to take a stand for their rights, especially important ones such as the second amendment. Numerous gun control advocates do not even know valid in depth …show more content…
“38% of U.S. households and 26% of individuals owned at least one gun, with about half . . . having four or more guns” (“Gun Control” 1). There should be mandatory gun safety classes and background checks when someone decides to buy a firearm. The government forces citizens to take a test to drive a motor vehicle. The same principle would be extremely useful in the firearm industry. According to a congressional research service report, there were 310 million firearms in the United States in 2009 (Cooper 14). Banning or attempting to control guns in America is nearly impossible, although the government could make the streets much safer with gun education and background checks.
Gun control in the United States will increase crime rates and give citizens less freedom. Moorhouse explains his perspective on gun control throughout his article.
Gun Control simply does not influence the behavior of criminals in their efforts to obtain and use firearms. Law abiding citizens can be expected to conform to the law and obtain permits, register guns, and enroll in firearm safety courses. By contrast, there would be no surprise if it were found that criminals regularly violate the law by purchasing guns illegal on black markets or by stealing them (Moorhouse 4).
Sowell states that gun control “simply disarm[s] law-abiding citizens, while people bent on violence find firearms readily …show more content…
According to Cooper, “gun deaths have been in general decline for more than 20 years, down some 31 percent since 1993. Between 1993 and 2000 the tally was down a full 50 percent, even as gun sales increased” (15). Cooper also states that mass shootings are “absolute outliers . . . accounting for far less than 1 percent of American gun deaths” (16). The government uses horrific stories of mass shooting to scare unaware citizens into voluntarily giving up one of their most important rights. Nevertheless, mass shootings are a horrific epidemic in American institutions today but taking away assault weapons and pistols from law-abiding citizens is not the correct
“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” (“The Bill of Rights: A Transcription”); this is a quote from the bill of rights that explains the right of all US citizens to own firearms. There is a reason that the bill of rights was created, and to talk about stripping anyone of something listed in the bill of rights is ridiculous. Should the government also do away with freedom of speech because it is dangerous to national security? The obvious answer is no; Citizens need to take a stand for their rights, especially important ones such as the second amendment. Numerous gun control advocates do not even know valid in depth …show more content…
“38% of U.S. households and 26% of individuals owned at least one gun, with about half . . . having four or more guns” (“Gun Control” 1). There should be mandatory gun safety classes and background checks when someone decides to buy a firearm. The government forces citizens to take a test to drive a motor vehicle. The same principle would be extremely useful in the firearm industry. According to a congressional research service report, there were 310 million firearms in the United States in 2009 (Cooper 14). Banning or attempting to control guns in America is nearly impossible, although the government could make the streets much safer with gun education and background checks.
Gun control in the United States will increase crime rates and give citizens less freedom. Moorhouse explains his perspective on gun control throughout his article.
Gun Control simply does not influence the behavior of criminals in their efforts to obtain and use firearms. Law abiding citizens can be expected to conform to the law and obtain permits, register guns, and enroll in firearm safety courses. By contrast, there would be no surprise if it were found that criminals regularly violate the law by purchasing guns illegal on black markets or by stealing them (Moorhouse 4).
Sowell states that gun control “simply disarm[s] law-abiding citizens, while people bent on violence find firearms readily …show more content…
According to Cooper, “gun deaths have been in general decline for more than 20 years, down some 31 percent since 1993. Between 1993 and 2000 the tally was down a full 50 percent, even as gun sales increased” (15). Cooper also states that mass shootings are “absolute outliers . . . accounting for far less than 1 percent of American gun deaths” (16). The government uses horrific stories of mass shooting to scare unaware citizens into voluntarily giving up one of their most important rights. Nevertheless, mass shootings are a horrific epidemic in American institutions today but taking away assault weapons and pistols from law-abiding citizens is not the correct