Our United States constitution was made by our founding fathers to help keep our country in order. We made the amendments to the constitution to help protect our citizens and keep everything fair. The 2nd 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."
If our government decided to control guns within the United States, they would be violating our constitutional rights. Now, I understand that people are upset with all of the recent shootings that have happened, but it is not the guns fault. The blame needs to go to the people who are providing mentally unstable people with firearms. We need to focus on prosecuting the people who are providing guns to people who shouldn't have them and to people who have illegal guns, such as automatic firing guns. A gun doesn't aim and pull the trigger by itself. It is a person who aims the gun and pulls the trigger. I will agree that our nation should implement stronger laws that go towards people purchasing guns. Some ideas that have came about are background checks and limiting the amount of ammunition someone can buy at one time. Taking guns out of the hands of United States citizens will cause an uproar. The gun control laws that Congress and President Obama want to install in our nation would mainly effect the law abiding citizens. The people of our great country that follow the laws and use their weapons for hunting, target shooting, recreational purposes, and self defense. Another issue with guns is concealed carry. Concealed carry is allowed in Texas, where it is warmer and people are out and about in the city more often than what people are in Chicago. The crime rate is much lower in Houston than it is in Chicago because there is a presence of guns. It scares people to do crimes because you never know who has a handgun on them. Other countries are more weary of the United States because we have gun bearing citizens, that if there comes a time and need for it, that would grab our rifles and fight for this country and protect it. The point I'm trying to get across here is that, with the presence of guns in our society it puts a fear into criminals. Controlling guns is not the answer, controlling the people who unlawfully use them is.
While I don't fully agree with your stance, you have a clear point with your proposed argument.
ReplyDeleteI think developing your three main arguments in more detail and giving them their own section will help make your point that much clearer. Start with that assessment of the 2nd amendment like you have it. Perhaps you will need to break it down a bit more than it already is here. Some things to think about is the definition of terms like "militia" in a modern stand point. If you think back to when the amendment was written (1791), it had a much different meaning then than now. The situation was just plain different. Is this need from 1791 the same need as now? Just a bit of looking at what the opposition may say.
Your points on infringing on the rights of citizens to own guns based on the 2nd amendment is a good follow up to your opening discussion of the amendment. I like that you make the assertion that it is not the gun but the person behind the gun. Can you find any statistics of gun ownership and illegal gun ownership to back up your claims? Are those that commit these mass shootings owners legally or illegally? Something to look up and consider.
Build on how laws should regulate background checks and how that might help save lives. This was good.
The last bit about concealed carry is interesting. You may need statistics here as well. You start on the right path with your discussion of Texas, but the comparison is a bit broad.
9/10