Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
One similarity that communities with high rates of burglaries share is the fact that these communities have "restrictive gun laws," which proves that indeed, gun control acts more as a detriment rather than a support to the status of peace and order in civil society. Its only weakness is perhaps the unpopular view that support for gun ownership elicits from the general public, owing from the fact that misconceptions about gun ownership and stereotypes about gun owners still influence the public's opinion on the issue.
Indeed, this perception of the general public is reflected on the post-9/11 reflection expressed by Maddox (2002). His reflection on the state of affairs concerning the right to bear arms was applied in the context of the World Trade Center bombings, wherein increased awareness and vigilance against terrorists have prompted the government to react and...
Profiling gun owners have become one of the measures adopted by the government, making gun ownership a selective process, and not a right to be exercised by any individual, whatever his/her racial background and status in the society. Maddox's report draws its strength from its relevance to the public, citing the 9/11 bombings as an example of a direct cause of greater implementation of gun control. However, a flaw in this report is the narrow-minded approach that the author subsisted to in order to argue his position, which is to impose gun control and restrict one's right to bear arms.
Bibliography
Maddox, a. (October 2002). "Cross burnings, the right to bear arms, and domestic terrorism." The New York Amsterdam News.
Reynolds, G. (January 2007). "A rifle in every pot." The New York Times.
Bibliography
Maddox, a. (October 2002). "Cross burnings, the right to bear arms, and domestic terrorism." The New York Amsterdam News.
Reynolds, G. (January 2007). "A rifle in every pot." The New York Times.
The framers did not mention police departments or other local governmental units, which has led to some misconceptions about the right of people to arm themselves when protected by municipal government agencies. However, this is because municipal police forces, as they currently exist, did not exist at the time of the Revolutionary War. The closest approximation was a standing army or militia, and the concerns about the citizenry failing
5.0 Conclusion As this paper has argued, the Second Amendment was designed not only to protect the militias; it was also intended to protect an individual's right to own and bear arms. Those groups opposed to the private ownership of firearms should base their arguments on their own personal beliefs rather than a Constitutional interpretation defense. As supported by its historical background and analysis of Constitutional context and meaning, "A well
In asserting that the right to bear arms must be interpreted in the collectivist point-of-view, the author rationalized that "the more collectively the right is interpreted, the more broadly Congress can legislate to restrict the right to bear arms" (347). In effect, what made sense in Busch's analysis is that this particular right, as stated in the Constitution, must be interpreted in the proper context. Thus, Emerson's ownership of
The first argument would be to point out that essentially, the right to bear arms is an individual right that can be exercised by any member of the civil society. In so doing, an individual is merely accomplishing a right that is rightfully his/hers from the beginning. The second main argument to be pointed out is that gun ownership does not necessarily translate to its improper use, posing as
5 ounces of steel in them. The bill did not pass, but eventually a compromise bill went through requiring all handguns to have at least 3.7 ounces of steel. No completely plastic gun has ever been produced, although guns with a plastic frame are popular because they weigh less. The legislation was unnecessary because, again, no problem existed. Apparently, the gun debate is not the place to look for facts. The
Right to Carry Handguns for Self-Protection: The right to carry handguns for law abiding citizens has been a continual social and political debate about the restriction or availability of firearms within the country. Actually, the right to carry handguns has developed to become one of the major controversial and intractable issues within the social and political environments in the nation. The main reason attributed to the development of this controversial issue