Research on Gun Control in the United States United States has the largest number of people owning guns, with an average of eight in ten people owning guns, approximately 270 million guns are in the hands of citizens – representing the largest ratio of guns per capita in the world. Among the population, 22 out of 100 Americans own more than one firearm, with women in this category owning 12 percent, while men owning 35 percent (DeGrazia, pp. 56-76). Over time, attempts have been made to impose regulations to limit gun ownership in the country, which not only violates the rights of Americans, but is also unjustifiable. Say no to plagiarism. Get a custom essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essayThe Second AmendmentOne of the strongest arguments for gun legalization is found in the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, which explicitly states that the right of citizens to own arms shall not be violated. It should be noted that American gun ownership is something even older than the country itself. This was recognized by the United States Supreme Court in its decision on the District of Columbia et al. v. Heller case where the court ruled that the Second Amendment was intended to protect the rights of private citizens, who are not connected with the military, to own guns and use them for traditional purposes deemed lawful - as se defend at home (Rostron). From the traditional use of arms in America, read in conjunction with the Constitution and the decision of the Supreme Court, it appears that Americans have the right to keep and bear arms, which is an essential aspect of their freedoms and freedom. their freedom – like other freedoms such as the right to worship and freedom of expression, among others which are protected by the government. Essentially, the government must protect this right, which means that introducing gun control laws would violate this expressed freedom. , this is not supported by statistics and is misleading. According to a survey conducted from 1980 to 2009, it was found that bans on assault weapons imposed in the United States did not have a significant impact on the number of murders in states where the ban was imposed. In fact, states where there were restrictions on carrying concealed weapons ended up having higher murder rates. Additionally, it is worth noting that in the 20th century the number of guns in the United States was more than twice that of the previous century – which may have led to a considerable reduction in the number of murders. Considering that criminals do not obey the laws in force, proposing laws to regulate the use of firearms would only contribute to increasing the use of weapons by criminals who would terrorize civilians who do not have access to them. weapons to protect oneself (Blocher, p. 813).Right to self-defenseAnother reason for not controlling gun ownership is that doing so would violate citizens' right to self-defense and, therefore, deny them a chance to feel safe. Data from the National Rifle Association reveals that people use guns 2.5 million times a year for protection. Since the police are unable to protect every citizen, instituting strict gun laws would create asituation in which civilians would have difficulty protecting themselves. The right of self-defense is a natural right borrowed from the right to life, where one would be required to defend oneself against people who intend to end the life of others. Regulating the possession and use of firearms would mean that people would have limited means to defend themselves, leading to an impediment to the right to life, particularly when the police are unable to provide security. personalized to all citizens (Ayres, Ian and Fredrick). gun control laws, government and government institutions would infringe on the privacy of citizens. Conducting a background check, as a prerequisite for gun ownership, would require the government to establish databases to store personal information about people who own guns, such as their names, addresses, backgrounds psychological health and other potentially private information. Building these databases for an indefinite period would create room for maneuver for their use in new ways, different from those initially collected. Additionally, the Constitution allows American civilians to own guns and firearms without government oversight, meaning that creating such a database and collecting private information is a violation of their privacy by the government and its institutions. It is not necessary to control the possession and use of firearms, but the government must strengthen education for the safe use of firearms. There is consensus that guns do not kill, but rather guns are used by people to kill or harm others. This means that people must be made aware and educated about the need for safe and responsible use of firearms, rather than imposing a permanent ban on the use and possession of firearms. Gun-related accidents are also common in different parts of America; an aspect which demonstrates that people who own firearms, or those who have access to these weapons, do not have sufficient education on their use. This education should be provided to all members of society, including growing children, to ensure they understand the need for responsible firearm use. Ideally, there are several things in society that are harmful when used for the wrong reasons, but helpful when used for the right reasons. Firearms should be treated as one of these items. Most of these gun control laws require people to pay certain amounts of money in order to own guns. This would impede the rights of poor citizens who cannot pay the required fees to own guns, while under this freedom the wealthy would still be able to pay the required fees. Other forms of discrimination could arise from personal records that are collected and used to determine whether an individual will be allowed to possess firearms, particularly regarding their health and criminal records, where certain groups of people could be prevented to own firearms because they have psychological health problems or a criminal record, even though these cases likely have no impact on the foreseeability of their harm. Keep in mind: this is just a sample. Get a personalized article from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Counterarguments On the contrary, there are Here are some pieces of evidence that could be used." (2009).

Essay / Research on Gun Control in the United States United States has the largest number of people owning guns, with an average of eight in ten people owning guns, approximately 270 million guns are in the hands of citizens – representing the largest ratio of guns per capita in the world. Among the population, 22 out of 100 Americans own more than one firearm, with women in this category owning 12 percent, while men owning 35 percent (DeGrazia, pp. 56-76). Over time, attempts have been made to impose regulations to limit gun ownership in the country, which not only violates the rights of Americans, but is also unjustifiable. Say no to plagiarism. Get a custom essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essayThe Second AmendmentOne of the strongest arguments for gun legalization is found in the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, which explicitly states that the right of citizens to own arms shall not be violated. It should be noted that American gun ownership is something even older than the country itself. This was recognized by the United States Supreme Court in its decision on the District of Columbia et al. v. Heller case where the court ruled that the Second Amendment was intended to protect the rights of private citizens, who are not connected with the military, to own guns and use them for traditional purposes deemed lawful - as se defend at home (Rostron). From the traditional use of arms in America, read in conjunction with the Constitution and the decision of the Supreme Court, it appears that Americans have the right to keep and bear arms, which is an essential aspect of their freedoms and freedom. their freedom – like other freedoms such as the right to worship and freedom of expression, among others which are protected by the government. Essentially, the government must protect this right, which means that introducing gun control laws would violate this expressed freedom. , this is not supported by statistics and is misleading. According to a survey conducted from 1980 to 2009, it was found that bans on assault weapons imposed in the United States did not have a significant impact on the number of murders in states where the ban was imposed. In fact, states where there were restrictions on carrying concealed weapons ended up having higher murder rates. Additionally, it is worth noting that in the 20th century the number of guns in the United States was more than twice that of the previous century – which may have led to a considerable reduction in the number of murders. Considering that criminals do not obey the laws in force, proposing laws to regulate the use of firearms would only contribute to increasing the use of weapons by criminals who would terrorize civilians who do not have access to them. weapons to protect oneself (Blocher, p. 813).Right to self-defenseAnother reason for not controlling gun ownership is that doing so would violate citizens' right to self-defense and, therefore, deny them a chance to feel safe. Data from the National Rifle Association reveals that people use guns 2.5 million times a year for protection. Since the police are unable to protect every citizen, instituting strict gun laws would create asituation in which civilians would have difficulty protecting themselves. The right of self-defense is a natural right borrowed from the right to life, where one would be required to defend oneself against people who intend to end the life of others. Regulating the possession and use of firearms would mean that people would have limited means to defend themselves, leading to an impediment to the right to life, particularly when the police are unable to provide security. personalized to all citizens (Ayres, Ian and Fredrick). gun control laws, government and government institutions would infringe on the privacy of citizens. Conducting a background check, as a prerequisite for gun ownership, would require the government to establish databases to store personal information about people who own guns, such as their names, addresses, backgrounds psychological health and other potentially private information. Building these databases for an indefinite period would create room for maneuver for their use in new ways, different from those initially collected. Additionally, the Constitution allows American civilians to own guns and firearms without government oversight, meaning that creating such a database and collecting private information is a violation of their privacy by the government and its institutions. It is not necessary to control the possession and use of firearms, but the government must strengthen education for the safe use of firearms. There is consensus that guns do not kill, but rather guns are used by people to kill or harm others. This means that people must be made aware and educated about the need for safe and responsible use of firearms, rather than imposing a permanent ban on the use and possession of firearms. Gun-related accidents are also common in different parts of America; an aspect which demonstrates that people who own firearms, or those who have access to these weapons, do not have sufficient education on their use. This education should be provided to all members of society, including growing children, to ensure they understand the need for responsible firearm use. Ideally, there are several things in society that are harmful when used for the wrong reasons, but helpful when used for the right reasons. Firearms should be treated as one of these items. Most of these gun control laws require people to pay certain amounts of money in order to own guns. This would impede the rights of poor citizens who cannot pay the required fees to own guns, while under this freedom the wealthy would still be able to pay the required fees. Other forms of discrimination could arise from personal records that are collected and used to determine whether an individual will be allowed to possess firearms, particularly regarding their health and criminal records, where certain groups of people could be prevented to own firearms because they have psychological health problems or a criminal record, even though these cases likely have no impact on the foreseeability of their harm. Keep in mind: this is just a sample. Get a personalized article from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Counterarguments On the contrary, there are Here are some pieces of evidence that could be used." (2009).

Navigation

« Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

Get In Touch