|
| |
GUN CONTROL.
Term Paper ID:29865
|
|
|
Essay Subject:
Argues against bearing arms.... More...
|
3 Pages / 675 Words
3 sources, 11 Citations,
MLA Format
$12.00
Return to List of Papers
|
Paper Abstract:
Argues against bearing arms. Contends that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does not provide unequivocal support for unlimited citizen possession of all types of guns. The lack of the need for ordinary, non-military citizens to fulfill the function of national defense in modern times.
Paper Introduction:
Gun Control
Gun control has emerged as one of the more contentious and emotionally charged issues in American politics, with advocates of gun control legislation as passionate about their position as members of the National Rifle Association and other gun ownership supporters. It will be argued in this brief essay that the meaning of the seminal words in the American Constitution that refer to this issue – “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" (quoted in Amar 103) – do not provide unequivocal support for unlimited citizen possession of all types of guns.
Those who call for almost unlimited access on the part of citizens to firearms of all types and descriptions always make reference to the foregoing
Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.
Other developed nations, according to Riczo (16),have accepted a reasonable compromise between ownership and common senserestrictions and view gun control as part of an overall public safety andhealth plan. Hugh LaFollette claims that there is a substantial body of empiricalevidence that the availability of guns does increases violent crime (17).Handguns in particular, says LaFollette have only two purposes: targetpractice for competitive or recreational sport and killing people (18).Few Americans hunt for game with a handgun unless that game is human.LaFollette (18) proposes that the government should consider making handgunowners and perhaps all gun owners strictly liable for harm caused by theuse of their guns in the same way that we make those using explosivesstrictly liable for any harm that they cause. No longer are ordinary, non-military citizens required tofulfill the function of national defense. Those who call for almost unlimited access on the part of citizens tofirearms of all types and descriptions always make reference to theforegoing words, which constitute the Second Amendment to the Constitutionand which were written in an era in which the United States did not possessa standing army or a permanent military force (Riczo 16). "Gun Control: The Issues." Criminal Justice Ethics, Winter-Spring 2 1, 2 (1), pp. In the wake of the recent sniper shootings in the Washington, D.C.,metropolitan area, many Americans believe that more stringent gun controlregulation is called for (Riczo 17). As A. "Guns, America, and the 21st Century." USA Today, March 2 1, 129(267 ), pp. 1 3-112.LaFollette, Hugh. 16-2 +. Works CitedAmar, A.R. "Second Thoughts." Law and Contemporary Problems, Spring 2 2, 65(2), pp. Americans also murder each other with guns at a rate 19 timeshigher than any of the 25 wealthiest nations (Riczo 17). Americans own 2 million guns of which about 7 million arehandguns. With the U.S. 17-18.Riczo, Steven. Amarcommented, the Framers of the Constitution and those officials whoselegislation amended it envisioned the necessity of mounting, almost withoutwarning, sufficient military force to defend the nation from externalattacks (1 4). A "well-regulated militia"exists in the form of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard, andNational guard - all military organizations composed of highly trainedenlisted people and their officers who serve and deploy force at the ordersof the Congress (Riczo 17). Clearly, a more responsible approach to controlling the use of guns,if not gun ownership, is necessary. Opponents of gun control argue thatcriminals and those who would "infringe" on the life, liberty and happinessof others will not be significantly deterred from obtaining (much lessusing) guns and other firearms. It will beargued in this brief essay that the meaning of the seminal words in theAmerican Constitution that refer to this issue - "A well-regulated militiabeing necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people tokeep and bear arms shall not be infringed" (quoted in Amar 1 3) - do notprovide unequivocal support for unlimited citizen possession of all typesof guns. Because thisis the case, a policy such as described above would serve the country andits citizens well. Many people would bedisinclined to own guns and those who do own them would be likely to takegreater care in storing, handling, and using them. The benefits of such a policy seem clear. Rather than requiringgun owners to give up their guns, the burden of responsible gun ownershipwould be placed squarely on the shoulders of those Americans who feel thatownership of a gun is desirable and beneficial. R. government providing fora national militia to defend the country, gun ownership in 2 2 seems to bea matter of personal choice rather than national necessity. Gun Control Gun control has emerged as one of the more contentious andemotionally charged issues in American politics, with advocates of guncontrol legislation as passionate about their position as members of theNational Rifle Association and other gun ownership supporters. Protecting the constitutional rights of individuals is a vitalfunction of government. This approach, on balance,"is justified because guns are inherently dangerous and it is onlyreasonable to expect people to take responsibility for their seriouslyrisky actions (LaFollette 18).
If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:
or
Click here to request an essay written just for you.
|
|
|
