Throughout the recent decade, the United States has been through a number of controversies and political battles. Many citizens could point most of this towards the recent Presidential elections of Barack Obama and, most recently, Donald Trump. The controversies that have been caused recently are numerous, but there has been one issue that has stood out among the rest. The issues of Gun Control, stricter gun laws, and even the banning of guns have been most prevalent. With the school shootings, church shootings, mass shootings, and others that are becoming more and more common, this issue is now starting to become a top priority for lawmakers in Washington. While these proposals may be a good concept on paper, the functionality and overall purpose of them are minimal, and they will not stop the violence that has been emerging throughout the country.
Second Amendment
The United States was partially founded on the Second Amendment, which is in short, The Right to Bear Arms. The Second Amendment has been discussed in many discussions lately, especially regarding the issue of the mass shootings that have occurred in recent years. The Second Amendment is described as, “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” (Cornell Law, 2017). As of late, some lawmakers, and some extreme liberals, have been pushing for a ban on guns, or even the removal of the Second Amendment completely. The essential idea of this does not do good for the country. While, in some people’s opinion, guns are the cause of these problems, in reality, guns are not the issue. The distribution and sales of guns are not the issue, the gun maker and the seller are not responsible for the violence. Many people in America believe that the creator and seller are responsible. They believe that the seller should know if they should sell a gun to the person or not. In reality, they run a proper background check, and if they do not see anything that could hinder the selling of a gun, they sell it. The responsibility of the seller at that exact point is shifted to the owner of that weapon. So any guilt put on the distributor and seller of the gun has no value in the court of law.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Rights of Felons
Many citizens of the US believe that if someone is a convicted felon, that person should not be able to have their 2nd Amendment rights. While, depending on the circumstances, that may benefit some parts of society, it infringes on those citizens’ rights. The Second Amendment is a collective right, as well as an individual right. In the Supreme Court case of United States vs. Kozerski, the ruling was that “in the context of a challenge to the law prohibiting the possession of firearms by convicted felons, the court, while holding correctly that the Second Amendment ‘is not a grant of a right but a limitation upon the power of Congress and the national government,’ concluded that the right ‘is a collective right . . . rather than an individual right’. As a district court in the First Circuit, however, the court was bound by Cases, which expressly recognized that the right belonged to individuals” (Shade’s Landing Inc, 1997-2009). The mere fact of taking a fundamental right away from an American is simply Ludacris. Every American has a right to keep a firearm in their home. The classification of “criminal” does not give the government the right to take that away. While special circumstances may arise and the convict may be classified as dangerous if and/or if not armed, their right should be immediately revoked. Other than that, Americans have a right to possess a firearm in their home. The Founding Fathers created the Constitution of the United States based on freedoms that they wanted the future of America to enjoy and cherish. They did not intend for those rights to be stripped away from an American citizen just because they have been arrested and/or convicted of a crime. With all of that being said, stricter gun laws throughout the US will impede on citizen’s Second Amendment rights to possess a firearm in their home, as well as “concealed carry” a firearm out in public. While there are places where carrying a firearm concealed is illegal, and there are adequate reasons for those laws, the enactment of stricter laws will make it so that there are more places where it is illegal to carry a firearm. Many liberals in America are in support of laws that prohibit in full of the idea of people not being able to carry weapons in public completely. This, by definition, will take away part of citizen’s 2nd Amendment rights, which is against the law. By law, Americans are entitled to all of their rights in whole, not part way. For example, while many people are against the idea of burning the American Flag, because of what it represents, it is protected under the First Amendment. Therefore, the United States government cannot, by law, ban flag burning, because it is a form of peaceful protest. This applies the same way to stricter gun laws and the 2nd Amendment. Infringing on a right that is guaranteed by the Constitution is in every way, shape, and form, illegal.
Concealed Carry Throughout Schools
The issue of concealed carry throughout churches and schools across the nation has been an ongoing battle in American politics. With the amount of school shootings, church shootings, and mass shootings in general, the right to carry weapons in public has been in question for a few years now. The idea of banning guns in schools has two sides to the argument. The first side is that it should be banned because of the fact that they are dangerous around young children, and even high schoolers, when the gun get in the wrong hands, there is a high chance that there will be a considerable amount of bloodshed. This is an obvious reason, but there are others that can give reasoning to this idea. The fact is that school is setting a precedent that they are in support of guns in schools, and while doing that, they will lose enrollment numbers based on the mere fact that parents are going to be worried about their child being in an environment that possesses firearms on sight. On the other hand, it is more rational than many people think to have a firearm ready on a school sight in lieu of a school shooting. In this case, the administration can go through training on how to properly use the firearm, and they can be able to neutralize the shooter at a moment's notice. In North Carolina, there is a bill that is in the works that will allow teachers to carry concealed weapons inside the classroom. They are presenting this bill because they want to have an immediate reaction to a school shooting situation. This is a good and bad thing because the situation could arise and there would be a teacher there to eliminate the threat. There could also be a situation where the teacher could be crazy and start firing off bullets in the classroom. This argument can go both ways and carry the same amount of weight. The bill in Charlotte, North Carolina, is called “House Bill 216, also known as the School Self-Defense Act” (Levins, 2019). In North Carolina, this bill has already passed the first step in becoming an active law. With the institution of stricter gun laws in the United States, this would not at all be possible. It would make it so that the teachers would not be able to bring guns anywhere near the school building. This bill, while it may seem scary and quite dangerous, is necessary for the protection of children’s lives in schools. This is what the world has come to, having to fear for life in school. The school was designed to be a safe haven for children to learn things and advance their skills to prepare them for adult life. Now, schools are a dangerous place, and kids truly think about if they are going to be getting on the bus on the way home from school, or are going to be shot in their 3rd hour class. The gun laws that lawmakers are thinking of putting together will prohibit this from happening in school systems. Granted, teachers will have to go through serious training and must keep the firearm locked and concealed at all times, but in this way, parents and kids will be able to know if they are going to be safe at school that day. They have a sense of security knowing that someone is going to protect them in case of an emergency at school.
Counter Argument
Many counterarguments can be presented in this debate, and many of them are truly valid and they make perfect sense. People across the country are right in saying that there should be stricter gun laws and regulations oh how easy it is to obtain them. Nowadays, it is extremely easy for a child, with the right mindset, to get set off by something, and lash out at their fellow peers. Whether it be a video game, a sport, or even a back-and-forth shouting match between friends. If a child has a certain mental deficiency or another condition that can cause overactive behavior, they are more likely to lash out at their peers as a result of one of them “setting the child off”. This can cause the child to start fights, get suspended from school, and even possibly be expelled. While lately, in today’s world, video games have been becoming more and more violent. Whether it be “Fortnite”, “Call of Duty, Black Ops: 4”, “Apex Legends”, or any other popular game in the US, these games involve shooting the opponent dead to win the match. This can twist a child’s brain into thinking that killing people and their friends is okay and is just a game. In reality, it is not just a game, it is a serious matter. It motivates children to try and recreate their favorite video game. By doing that, they lash out at the school and shoot it up. Recently in the news, multiple reports have shown that little siblings found their father’s pistol, and the child killed their sibling. Stricter gun laws can prohibit that from happening. Stricter gun laws will make it a law that requires all weapons in the household to be locked up in a safe and stored away from children. Thus, keeping children safe and out of harm’s way in the household in regards to guns. It can also prevent children from obtaining guns and bringing them to school potentially harming their classmates. With that being said, the enactment of gun control laws could potentially save lives.
Conclusion
While these proposals may be a good concept on paper, the functionality and overall purpose of them are minimal, and they will not stop the violence that has been emerging throughout the country. The thought that has gotten in lawmakers' heads that support this idea has two sides, while they only see one. They see the potentiality of lives being saved, but they do not see the extra spending that this will cost, and the rights that will be infringed upon. Infringing on an American citizen’s rights is in every way, shape, and form illegal. The mere fact that these laws will, in the end, become irrelevant, is an indicator that these laws should not be enacted in the first place. While there could potentially be some positive outcomes from these laws, in the possibility that lives could be saved, school shootings and mass shootings could be stopped, and accidental shootings at home could be prevented. In reality, being as tragic as it may be, these events will continue to occur. People will continue to die at the cold-blooded hands of a shooter, and lives will continue to be lost due to horrid gun violence throughout the nation.
Stuck on your essay?
