The Second Amendment (U.S. citizen's right to bear arms)
The Second Amendment (U.S. citizen's right to bear arms)
The Second Amendment got adopted on December 15, 1791 which provided U.S. citizens the right to bear arms. The amendment led to the horrible massacre at Virginia Tech on April 16, 2007 when single gunmen shot 32 people (Virginia Tech massacre, 2014, May 3). The Second Amendment holds that, the right of an American citizen to have and keep arms were respected at all times. As a result of that statute, research indicates that over 40% of the American homesteads are in possession of an arm. At the same time, over 90% of the American populace agreed with the statute that they must be in possession of a firearm. On the other hand, almost 81% of them were of the view that in order for any presidential candidate to have the opportunity to be in office, his/her manifesto ought to have gun control policies. That would ensure that he/she stood a chance of having the people’s votes. From the statistical revealed herein, there were over 16 thousand murders that were, as a result, of gun handling in the year 2008 alone. Evidently, no other weapons would result to such a high cause of death with the exception of guns (Fair.org, 2000). It is from that rationale that this paper will endeavor at elucidating and giving further details on the question whether private ownership of guns aids a country fight criminals, or whether it leads to a society full of social chaos.
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution to protect the rights of individuals to keep and bear arms was adopted in the late 1700s as revealed exceedingly. However, the deadliest shooting incident by a single man in United States occurred on the campus of Virginia Polytechnic University, which took place on April 16, 2007, as a result, of gun possession. Consequently, incidents occurring because of the Second Amendment that was meant to protect the right of people to bear arms turns to be a source or base of heated debate on whether it should be annulled or not.
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution was made to protect the rights of individuals to keep and bear arms and adopted in the late 1700s. Personal self-defense was the primary purpose of the Second Amendment, and they never thought that the statute would have resulted to the more deaths that are on recorded to have a result because of gun possession (Fair.org, 2000). Besides, in the olden times, guns were purposefully allowed to increase personal safety explaining why the aspect of personal defense and resisting oppression by help of a gun made more sense, and necessitated the possession of the gun to the point that an Amendment was made to that effect. Moreover, guns were used for other activities such as game hunting something that would not be possible without the possession of guns. Aspects such as murder, drug trafficking and other illegal activities committed with the help of guns in modern times were rare explaining why it was not a topic of deliberation by the populace.
As a result of private gun possession, various negative aspects were recorded starting with the mentioned above shooting incident by a single man in United States occurred on the campus of Virginia Polytechnic University, which took place on April 16, 2007 that have remained to be the deadliest. In addition to that, Seung- Hui Cho senior from Virginia Tech deadly shot 32 people and later committed suicide is as well recorded. The massacre prompted the state of Virginia to close legal loopholes that had previously allowed Cho, adjudicated as mentally unsound to purchase handguns without detection by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (Agresti & Reid, 2010). Worth mentioning also was the recent gun incident that took place at the Sandy Hook Elementary School. It was where that a gun was used by an elementary kid to not only kill his teacher, but also murdering fellow kids, as well as his mother back at home. As a result of such and more revealed incidents herein occurring because of the Second Amendment, which protects the right of people to bear arms, there is an argument if it should be repealed or not. While other countries like the United Kingdom have strict rules and regulations when it comes to gun ownership resulting to fewer people gaining access to guns, Americans are allowed to gain access to them thanks to an amendment under deliberation herein. As a result of incidents occurring, the debate whether it should be repealed or not has increased over the years.
Positive and negative effects of gun possession were expounded to conclusively ascertain if the amendment ought to be repelled or not. The citizens of the country were in a position to act in self-defense in any life-threatening situation if they are allowed to have and keep guns. Besides, any laws that were implemented, on the contrary, gun possession would be termed as violations of individual rights and freedoms that as well protected by the constitution (Schelbert, 2000). They argued that the constitution allows for individuals to defend themselves something that they would not be in a position to do or accomplish if the implemented laws were against gun possession. A similar argument that surfaced together with the various attempts to fight off the laws that might disallow citizens to have and keep guns is the comparison to other countries with strict guns rules (Agresti & Reid, 2010). The United Kingdom as mentioned herein has strict guns rules. That resulted to supporters of gun possession to claim that the effects of crime such as homicides, drug trafficking, and murders were almost similar with those of the United States that has the constitution allowing them to have and keep guns. The idea that was that even if the guns laws are removed and amended to ensure that private gun ownership does not take place, their effects would persist (Dezhbakhsh & Rubin, 1998).
In addition to that, no research done on the subject of disallowing private ownership of guns were found to conclusively indicated that gun control legislation would be more effective in controlling gun and at the same time, reduce gun-related cruelties around the country. That fact was strengthened by various factors that include but not limited to the fact that there are integral faults with the laws (Poe, 2001). Such faults are the ones that make correct assumptions and suppositions about the subject impossible to realize. There are also many adjustable that were reflected on while studying gun related violence. For example in the Kwon research, the discoveries would have been more precise had the research engrossed and motivated on one facet and trait of gun violence such as human murders and weapons. Likewise, the range of the studies covering robbery, homicide, perversity, aggravated assault, and non-negligent manslaughter, were too wide (Kass, J. (2009). As a result, the conclusions that would be termed to have inconsequential relationships that would effectively result to the adaptation of more strict rules that would ensure guns are limited to the public.
Furthermore, many investigators established and centered their findings on dialogues or interviews. Hence, that would not amount to conclusive research as it only gave individual’s sensitivities about their safety upon introduction of gun laws that would see to it the tightening of gun possession laws (Duggan, 2001). Such resulted to prejudice and prejudgment for the reason that people would lie in order to endorse and stimulate what they feel signifies and optimizes their good interest on the subject under discussion. Hence, better and sound ways would have to be formulated in order for effective and conclusive research would be done resulting to strict rules to be formulated aimed to reduce the injustices that result because of gun possession (Agresti & Reid, 2010).
An additional indication that indicate and supports the notion that disallowing guns would reduce crime might be the position of the representatives or office bearers. While they hold onto the optimism that austere gun principles would lessen the number of gun related crimes and peddle some of which have been mention within the paper, other psychological and social factors that lead to criminal activity proves them to be wrong. Rather than blame gun ownership for the social injustice that have been taking place over the years, deficiency, being without a job, ethnic and cultural factors, as well as the alcohol consumption levels in the country, ought to get blamed (Duggan, 2001). It is only through such realization that they would deal with and the need to use guns to satisfy such basic needs will have reduced. That way, the negative effects of guns possession would have been solved. Besides, the country might manage to limit access and use of guns but crimes and other social injustices that are being recorded will continue bearing in mind that the basic needs of people were satisfied fully. Prior studies were able to establish an association between criminal violence and unemployment, racial discrimination, uneducated youths, and alcoholism (Dezhbakhsh & Rubin, 1998). Until those problems addressed fully, the marginalized in society would continue to engage in violence. Often, it occurs through the use of illegal firearms that they would access to through other ways similar to those used by Seung- Hui Cho senior from Virginia Tech managed to get the gun he used (Virginia Tech massacre, 2014, May 3). One study assessed the link between these social aspects mentioned herein and gun related violence conducted in 1997. The study applied multivariate deterioration models from where it positive facts emerged to show that there exists a close connection relationship between deaths caused by firearms and socio-economic factors particularly the state’s racial mix, poverty levels and alcoholism (Agresti & Reid, 2010). For instance, it was established that Hispanics had subordinate rates of firearm interrelated deaths matched to blacks while younger populace and societies in metropolitan areas had insignificant relationship between gun related deaths and the social aspects. Without a doubt, therefore, it would be deduced without hesitation then that gun-control legislation or going contrary to The Second Amendment would not entirely challenge firearm related violence to result to the burn of private gun use. Rather, an all-inclusive and more collaborative methodology would be needed to be sorted for as opposed to the operational approach that legislation and changes that might be brought about by transforming The Second Amendment from the way it is at the moment (Duggan, 2001).
In conclusion, the Second Amendment has its own positive and negative sides; positives are that the citizens can defend themselves in any situation. However, it could be deduced from the exceeding discussion that once a society developments and face reduced social inequalities mentioned, the populace might start feeling the prerequisite of certifying their personal security. That they would do by having guns as ascertained in The Second Amendment, but not applying them for other unjust acts such as crime or murder. On the other hand, there is a negative side of the amendment (Dezhbakhsh & Rubin, 1998). For example, the Virginia Tech massacre that was deadly for 32 people because a killer could get a weapon legally. However now it’s a debate whether the Second Amendment should be repealed or not because there is a good side to it and a negative side, such as the lives of people.
Reference
Agresti, J.D. and Reid K. S. (2010). "Gun Control Facts.” Just Facts, September 13, 2010. Revised on June 7, 2011 from http://justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp
An Argument for Repealing or Clarifying the Second Amendment. (n.d.). The Daily Banter. Retrieved March 7, 2014, from http://thedailybanter.com/2013/05/an-argument-for-repealing-or-clarifying-the-second-amendment/
Dezhbakhsh, H & Rubin, P (1998). The effects of concealed-handgun laws on crime: The American economic review Vol 88, No 2, pp. 468-474. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/116969
Duggan, M. (2001). More Guns, More Crime. The Journal of Political Economy. Vol. 109, No. 5, pp. 1086-1114. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/322833
Fair.org, (2000). Gun Control, the NRA, and the Second Amendment. Retrieved from http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2587
Gun Facts | Second Amendment, Origins and Court Rulings. (n.d.). gunfacts. Retrieved March 7, 2014, from http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/secondamendment/
Kass, J. (2009) Columbine: A True Crime Story. Ghost Road Press
Poe, R. (2001). The Seven Myths of Gun Control, California: Prima Publishing, pp. 75- 83
Pro/con debate: Should the Second Amendment be repealed?. (n.d.). ydr.com. Retrieved March 7, 2014, from http://www.ydr.com/ci_20549025/pro-con-debate-should-second amendment-be-repealed
Schelbert, L. (2000). Switzerland under siege; Rockport, Maine; Picton Press
Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. (2014, February 3). Wikipedia. Retrieved March 6, 2014, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Second Amendment. (n.d.). LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved March 4, 2014, from http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment
TED Conversations. (n.d.). Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?. Retrieved March 7, 2014, from http://www.ted.com/conversations/15464/has_the_time_come_for_the_u_s.html
Things You Didn't Know About the Second Amendment. (n.d.). PolicyMic. Retrieved March 5, 2014, from http://www.policymic.com/articles/24557/9-things-you-didn-t-know-about-the-second-amendment
Time to repeal the Second Amendment, eh?. (n.d.). Examiner.com. Retrieved March 7, 2014, from http://www.examiner.com/article/time-to-repeal-the-second-amendment-eh
Virginia Tech massacre. (2014, May 3). Wikipedia. Retrieved March 5, 2014, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_massacre
Virginia Tech Massacre. (n.d.). ABC News. Retrieved March 7, 2014, from http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/us/virginia-tech-massacre.htm
