Response Paper
The second amendment to the first amendment it accepts that the God-given natural right of the people, and allows the government not to interfere with the exercise of power thus there is nowhere the constitution grants the public to arm themselves. Instated, in today society, are highly being alert about the gun violence, it is important to understand both sides of the views points of the second amendments to modify it or leave it the way it is. In this case paper we will focus on the Warren E. Burger's the right to bear arms. He argues that, the guns control is too tough for people in the current society to handle (Rikoon 193-195)Burger in his article describes society today as entirely different with that of the past decades.
People are coming more violent, and the rate of crime is also steadily increasing that it used to be in the past decades. Burger had several reasons for against the position of guns by the public, for instant; he argues that lack of effort from the police department to protect the public against crimes and offering support of security to the public. The police and safety organizations have slowly given up controlling the issues of security and crimes. This idea of Burger is not allowing the second amendment and gets rid of it, but instant let the government security organs to use a gun but not the public.
Burger believes that this strategy of people owning the guns could more regulate, and people will not be able to use arms for the wrong purpose. He draws his arguments from the past decade society, where people needed weapons to protect themselves from the foreign attacks; thus they were using the guns in the right manner. Additionally, he argues that the founding fathers did not want every person armed in order to protect themselves, however, the reason for arming themselves was to eliminate enemies who suppress the rights of free person (Rikoon 197-199)
Burger says that public owning the gun is the biggest danger today society is facing and yet the Politician and leaders are not addressing the real problems of public to own the weapons in our society. Therefore, the society is paying the price of misdirection for thousands of murders, rape, and robberies. He argues that in the past decades, our founding fathers knew that the government will turn the criminal thus they were no need for every person to possess the guns. Burger believes by having self-military forces such as the National Guard, and then guns should control the everyday citizens that may harm others by their history.
The Burger's argument is the most sensible choice. He is not against burning the guns from the public but earned. With his arguments, the government can decide if or not a wanting licensed person is responsible and smart using the gun in the right manner (Rikoon 190-191) In conclusion, it is important to have more knowledge how people take in ideas based on the past and present events. It is better to understand why Burger emphasizes recent decade’s society with the current culture and do away the ideas of the public to own the guns. Therefore, Burger ideas are all about the changes in society that had taken over time.
ReferenceRikoon, J. S., & Goedeke, T. L. (2000). Anti-environmentalism and citizen opposition to the Ozark man and the biosphere reserve. Lewiston, N.Y: Edwin Mellen Press.
