- Introduction: The Second Amendment is crucial to the very nature of American democracy.
- First point: The framers of the constitution wrote the constitution under the assumption that the most important governing document would not let government pass restrictions that would prevent free citizens from owning a firearm.
- Second Point: Media coverage is often slanted on the issue, with different media fighting with each other instead of offering objective viewpoints on the issue.
- Third Point: Self-defense, stopping government tyranny, protecting from foreign invasions are three reasons why the government should not pass laws infringing about the second amendment.
- Conclusion: What is needed is logical legislation without looking at the issue as it stands.
The Second Amendment is crucial to the very nature of American democracy. It protects citizens from threats without and outside our borders. Arguments against the second amendment, while sometimes raising interesting questions, often blame the second amendment for other problems within society. This essay analyzes those concerns, the arguments against citizen’s rights for guns, and points out why those arguments are flawed.
The fathers of founding of the US wrote the constitution under the assumption that the most important governing document would not let government pass restrictions that would prevent free citizens from owning a firearm. “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” is how the 2nd Amendment, passed by congress on December 15, 1791. But some say a “well-regulated militia” does not mean a private citizens. While these sentences can be interpreted in different ways, the best way to do it is to go back to what the writer of the document meant. Thomas Jefferson authored not just the founding documents of the United States, but wrote extensively about the thought and political theories that when into them. Jefferson wrote in a note of the a draft of the Virginia Constitution that “No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms (within his own lands or tenements.” Jefferson would have considered public land within the rights of a person to bear arms (Coats, 1).
Media cover issue of gun control, often presents false things in favor of gun control. Violence certainly exists in the US, but to argue against guns is like arguing against the ownership of fists and require that people not only lose their right to bear arms but also their arms. Guns aren’t the problem. Guns are sometimes used by people with problems that would cause harm to other with or without guns. When on December 14, 2012, children were shot to death in Sandy Hook Elementary School this issue has re-emerged with both sides very polarized on the issue and presenting vastly different interpretation of facts. People who be supporting gun control, such as president Barack Obama, brought up the issue and wanted to pass gun reform right now. This is a tragedy. But legislation should not be rushed through congress before there has been antiquate time to debate and sort out such issue.
The casualties were severe and sweeping as they were defenseless children. The shooter then added his own mom to the list of the dead and then turned the gun on himself. (Bismarck Tribune, 4A). A gun was used in these tragic events. But a gun was is not to blame for what it is used for. The real question behind Sandy Hook is not how this person could have committed these crimes with a gun, but how our public health system repeatedly fails to identify such people. While guns are certainly part of this discussion, it should not be guns that are front and center. The most important question is now “Why don’t we have more gun control.” The two most important questions are “Why do we have a public health system that fails to identify people which such deep emotion problems, and why does our society produce such damaged individuals?” A person should not ask the question of how many people are hurt by guns in the United States each year without also asking how many people guns keep safe from harm annually. One important reason why I believe people should be able to bear arms is for self-defense. Sometimes law enforcement is not there to protect a person and he or she needs to protect his or her own self. A good example of this is what happened in 1992 in the Los Angeles riots. During these riots there was a shopping center that was being robbed by a number of people. There were no police around to stop them. Because the owners of the shopping centers were armed with assault rifles and handguns, they were able to protect themselves, their property, and their property. It is very likely that not just money but lives were saved during the riot because the 2nd Amendment allowed these free citizens to bear arms.
Pro gun people argue say the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. The other side counters that the more guns equal more deaths, both accidental and intentional by guns. (UNDC, 4) This statistic is rarely presented with the following important thought, “How many murders by guns would be carried out by other means should the murderer had not had access to a gun?” There can be no data on something so speculative, but it is important to realize from this that there is a reason for the saying that there are lies, damn lies and statistics.
Media coverage is often slanted on the issue, with different media fighting with each other instead of offering objective viewpoints on the issue. The New York Times did an article about what they considered to be Fox News biased coverage of the issue. It is certainly a charged issue, but people and news organization should be allowed to choose a side of the issue without being called biased. The New York Times, instead of looking into the issue, instead attacked Fox New’s reporting and wrote, “The Decision not to show the president’s angry rejouring to the Senate vote – or to cover the vote in any detail an hour earlier – was the latest example of Fox’s evident lack of interesting in the gun violence debate that has captivated many other media outlets” (NY Times, 5).
Senate majority Harry Read seemed closed to the debate on the issue, but wanted to use Sandy Hook as a way to pass a law that still was questionable to many. He said that it was "only a matter of time before we bring this anti-gun violence measure back to the floor for a vote." (Yahoo, 1). He offered no potential time frame for the process.
Lost in this sometimes silly debate is the most important reason for citizens to own guns. It is the idea in America that the fathers of founding of the constitution passed the second amendment to the constitution (Coats, 1). They passed the second amendment as a way to stop government tyranny. They wrote the US Constitution aware that one-day government could take a turn for the worse and work against its citizens, imposing tyranny upon them. This is why they wrote the 2nd amendment, so that people could legally protect themselves from their own government gone-wrong. The 2nd Amendment is not only for keeping and bearing arms; it is also to protect people’s freedom if government tries to take it away from people. This is in line with what Thomas Jefferson mean when he said, “When governments fear people there is liberty. When people fear governments it is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect them against tyranny in government” (Jefferson). Guns not just protect us from internal threats, but especially from external threats. It protects the US from invasion. Even if another country succeeds in defeating our military, the other country would know what a strategically difficult task it would be to occupy the United States since it is a vast country of 300,000,000 armed citizens. There are real world examples of this. During World War the emperor of Japan instructed his commanders to plan an invasion of America. He was emboldened by Peal Harbor and thought that the U.S. Military was rather weak. At the time it was more weak than before from it’s engagements in World War II. The Commander in Chief of the Japanese navy told his emperor, “You cannot invade the mainland of the United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass” (Smitha, 1). It was not the US army he was referring to, but the American people. The United States is not just defended by it’s military, but also it’s people, who represent its government.
The gun debate is a heated one. There are many people that are against guns. They think that guns are violent and the purpose of them is tfor killings. High profile media cases have sent the message that the problems of gun violence are because of gun ownership. These are separate things and should be so in the discussion on the issue. The second amendment does not mean that everyone, including the mentally ill should own guns. But any law-abiding citizen has a constitutionally enshrouded right to own gun.
What is needed is logical legislation without looking at the issue as it stands. The second amendment’s right to bar arms as a powerful citizen base of support. But it is still a heavily polarized issue As a result, in the news coverage of the current state of the issue, with the latest update being gun measures failing the senate by a margin of six votes, different media outlets while reporting on the same issue, do so in different ways. Self-defense, stopping government tyranny, protecting from foreign invasions are three reasons why the government should not pass laws infringing about the second amendment.
Work Cited
Background Check In Peril In Senate - ABC News." ABCNews.com - Breaking News, Latest News & Top Video News - ABC News. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 2013. <http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/background-check-peril-senate/story?id=18978861#.UXFTuyvwKYk>.
"Background check plan defeated in Senate, Obama rips gun bill opponents | Fox News." Fox News - Breaking News Updates | Latest News Headlines | Photos & News Videos. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 2013. <http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/17/background-check-plan-in-trouble-as-dems-call-votes-on-gun-bill/>.
Coates, E. R. (n.d.). Jeffersonian Perspective: Guns & 2nd Amendment. Jeffersonian Perspective: Guns & 2nd Amendment. Retrieved May 22, 2014, from http://eyler.freeservers.com/JeffPers/jefpco29.htm
Smitha. (n.d.). The Occupation of Japan. The Occupation of Japan. Retrieved May 22, 2014, from http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch23set-4.htm
"Loaded language poisons gun debate - CNN.com." CNN.com International - Breaking, World, Business, Sports, Entertainment and Video News. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 2013. <http://edition.cnn.com/2013/01/31/politics/gun-language>.
"Senate rejects expanded gun background checks - CNN.com." CNN.com International - Breaking, World, Business, Sports, Entertainment and Video News. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 2013. <http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/17/politics/senate-guns-vote/index.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_allpolitics+%28RSS%3A+Politics%29>.
"Senate rejects expanded gun background checks - CNN.com." CNN.com International - Breaking, World, Business, Sports, Entertainment and Video News. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 2013. <http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/17/politics/senate-guns-vote/index.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_allpolitics+%28RSS%3A+Politics%29>.eaders, agreement of Senate. "Gun Control Loses: No Expanded Background Checks - ABC News." ABCNews.com - Breaking News, Latest News & Top Video News - ABC News. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 2013. <http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/senate-vote-nears-background-check-bill-peril-18975627#.UXFVMSvwKYk>.
"For gun control, now what? A look at the issue." The Bismarck Tribune. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2013. <http://bismarcktribune.com/news/national/what-now-for-gun-control-a-look-at-the-issue/article_a0e1ab68-6173-5102-88dd-6f4cda8279db.html>.
"Fox News, MSNBC and the Gun Debate - NYTimes.com." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2013. <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/19/business/media/fox-news-msnbc-and-the-gun-debate.html?_r=0>.
"Senate Democratic leader Reid hits "pause" on gun-control bill - Yahoo! News." Yahoo! News - Latest News & Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2013. <http://news.yahoo.com/blow-obama-senate-blocks-gun-control-plan-005249522.html>.
"Senate leaders: Too close to say if gun control bill has the votes to pass | Fox News." Fox News - Breaking News Updates | Latest News Headlines | Photos & News Videos. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2013. <http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/14/senate-leaders-too-close-to-say-if-gun-control-bill-has-votes-to-pass/>.
"Senate leaders: Too close to say if gun control bill has the votes to pass | Fox News." Fox News - Breaking News Updates | Latest News Headlines | Photos & News Videos. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2013. <http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/14/senate-leaders-too-close-to-say-if-gun-control-bill-has-votes-to-pass/>.
