Second Amendment and Gun Control Debate Essay

Debate about the gun control is one of the most controversial issues in our society. Those, who stand for their rights to own a firearm, state that this right was proclaimed by the founding brothers and it is reflected in the Constitution.

“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” (Second Amendment to the Constitution). The right of the people to possess arm is proclaimed by the Constitution and local authorities should do everything possible in order to help people to use this right.

Gun control proponents organize committees and demonstrations. Their opponents get great support from the National Rifle Association (NRA). Both sides used different techniques to attract people to their side. Attracting celebrities and famous people to their sides has become an important and meaningful weapon used by both sides.

The Virginia Tech massacre has given a new push to gun debate. Proponents of gun control gave this argument as a reason to prohibit gun possession. Proponent of gun control legislation believe that modifying the Second Amendment can help to resoles this situation. It is evident some regulations for the gun owing are necessary but they should not violate human rights especially those, which are guaranteed by the Constitution.

Proponents of the gun control legislation see gun household ownership as the reason of increase of violent crimes, suicides and accidents connected with arms. They state that gun possession increases probability of becoming the victim of crime and at the same time creates probability of committing the crime yourself.

In the US full-automatic guns are legal in most of the states but the owners have to pass a lot of stages before they obtain the permission to have this kind of gun. Every person, who wants to possess an automatic weapon must pay tax, must obtain approval for the purchase from the local sheriff, than he has to submit his fingerprint the ATF, undergo criminal background check and than wait for several months for final permission. Taking the weapon from one state to another is also complicated by obtaining special permissions. All these strict rules do not stop people, who want to possess firearms, though. Statistics show that the number of people who want to possess guns increases with every year. There are a number of states that have prohibited the sell of full-automatic firearms. In some states only semi-automatic weapons can be sold and bought. You need to meet all legal requirements to pass criminal background check and to fill in some papers in order to get the permission to possess this kind of arm.

Both sides give their arguments and it is worth listening to both sides to make the right conclusion.

Those who stand for legislation of firearm possession stress on the defense of freedom as one of the main issues.

They state that gun control was one of the signs of totalitarian states and things like this cannot be accepted in the democratic state. Giving the right for the arm possession only to special organizations, which represent the state power; it deprives the citizens’ rights and makes them defenseless in front of the state abuse. Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and the number of Communist countries give us perfect examples of such a phenomenon. Opponents of gun legislation advocates state that there is no causal relationship between the gun possession and the level of the democracy in the country. They state that there are a number of countries, such as Canada, Australia, Japan and the Untied Kingdom that have gun control but are considered to be democratic. Even more, gun possession was legalized during the beginning of Third Reich reign.

Advocates of the gun ownership legalization give the right to fight-defense as one of their main arguments. The right to defend you in the measures defined by laws is a constitutional right of each individual. By their opinion gun possession gives citizens better opportunities for self-defense. Some researches found causal correlation between gun possession and the number of violent crimes. Gun possession reduces the number of violent crimes (Lott, 2000).

This means that armed defense can be regarded as an allowable self-defense.

The defense of the property was one of the reasons for gun possession legislation. Advocates of this possession put forward the argument that firearm could help to protect houses from robberies and invasions. This is partially true but at the same time firearm possession has one negative effect which has almost weighed down all positive effects.

This negative consequence is an increase of domestic violence and the use of firearm during domestic conflicts.

Those who are against gun control give a lot of arguments to support their point of view. They admit that much or less, but still gun control laws have existed in the US for the last 200 years. But they believe that society has a tendency to evolution and the growth of moral standards and values of each individual proves unnecessity of gun control in the future. They count on the second Amendment, which proclaims the right of people to keep and bear arms. Those who stand for this point state that any types of guns contradict constitution. They believe that gun control laws will defeat the liberty, guaranteed by the Second Amendment, and thus, will create threat for all other liberties guaranteed by the Constitution. People who stand against gun control state that gun legislation can not guarantee the reduce of the crime rate but at the same time creates threat to the population as it makes people defenseless in from on the armed criminals. Opponents of gun control state also that firearm is not the only weapon which can kill people. Cold steel, such as knives and other weapons can be used for killing people but we can not prohibit the use of all kinds of weapon. They stress on the fact that if the person wants to commit the crime, he or she will find means for it despite any gun control laws. Opponents of gun control laws put forward the thesis that only people kill people, but not any kind of weapons do. This is why it is stupid to look for the root of the problem in the weapons used for killing. So, gun control laws are very unlikely to have any positive effect on the crime rate (and statistics prove this) but people deprived of their rights to defense themselves can suffer because of such laws.

Opponents of gun legislation stress on the constitutional right of each individual to protect himself and they believe arm possession to be one of the means of self-defense. Another big group of reasons put forward by those who do not support gun control legislation is expressed by the hunters. People, who like hunting and even earn living by it, will definitely suffer because of gun control restrictions.

Movement in the support of gun control has become especially active during last several years. Mass media heated the public interest to this problem and the number of tragedies, when innocent people became the victims of firearm use provoked intensive movement in the support of gun control. It is necessary to listen to the arguments of the supporters of gun control, as each opinion must be heard. First of all they don not believe that the right to bear firearms is reflected in the Constitution. They also state that unskillful use of firearms creates more danger to their owners than protects them. The rate of the people who became accidental victims of firearms is too high, they state.

They believe that gun bearing leads to the increase of suicides, accidents and violence rates. Proponents of the gun legislation also state that the use of a firearm is very often conditioned by the necessity. Using firearm against an unarmed criminal is not legal and using it against the armed criminal is senseless in the most of the cases.

Supporters of the gun control also state that it is the state’s function to defend its citizens and bearing arms should be the function of the police. They emphasis that this variant was put down as the draft for the Second Amendment, later changed, though and that this very variant should be considered the right one. They don not believe that using firearms could be a good way of protection against crime as it creates more danger.

Gun control proponents also believe that gun control legislation can create fewer possibilities for the criminals to obtain arms.

Proponents of the gun legislation often give statistics that shows that one of the main reasons of children death because of firearms is an accident, which results careless use of arms. Statistics also shows that the probability of suicide using the gun is five times higher in the houses where there is firearm. (Freed 231).

Leave a Reply