Should Gun Rights Be Limited?

In: Business and Management

Submitted By okiman44
Words 481
Pages 2
Should gun rights be limited? This is a broad question. I will focus closely to what was written in the attached article “Gun rights and corresponding responsibilities” from the Chicago Tribune by Christine Johanson Ross, of Buffalo Grove. The author breaks right into a non sequitur fallacy, as she is assuming that her thought on gun safety is “commonsense”. She uses many other examples throughout history to prove her point. She uses the similarity of restricted first amendment rights to justify why it is ok to impose additional laws for gun owners.
The author states that “20,000 American children and teens die from gun violence yearly”. The author does not state where she got her information from. The non-profit organization, Children’s Defense Fund (CDF) started in 1979, uses information from multiple government agencies. The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention in 2008 and 2009, reported a total of 5,740 children and teens aged 0-19, that were killed by guns. The CDF information is verified by the CDC.
Center for Disease and Control (CDC), reports annually on the number of deaths in the United States. The numbers below only include deaths caused by firearms. The CDC breaks its statistics down into smaller categories. This particular report is broken down by age and also by type of gun violence. Their numbers include a larger group than the author included, which were children and teens only. By my definition, children and teens would be aged 0-19. The author does not define her age group clearly. You can clearly see by this report that the author has over exaggerated her numbers to plead her case.
2010 CDC number and break down for firearm deaths are following:
Accidental discharge of firearms 207
Suicide by firearm 2127
Homicide by firearm 4108
Undetermined intent 70
Total 6305
Like in most articles, it is easy to…...

Similar Documents

Gun Rights

...argument in opposing gun laws. This reference serves as a tool to look up the actual laws and restrictions that California residents must follow. The pamphlet contains a general summary of California laws that govern common possession and use of firearms by persons other than law enforcement officers, firearms dealers, or members of the armed forces. It is not designed to provide individual guidance for specific situations, nor does it attempt to summarize federal law. A special interest in the actual definitions of “assault weapons”, “sawed off shotguns”, and “firearms”, is taken in consideration because it specifies the schematic descriptions of these illegal firearms. The information in the pamphlet will be used as a reference for what is considered the strictest restrictions on firearms that exist out of all the United States. Kopel, David. (1998). Second Amendment in the Nineteenth Century. Retrieved October 27, 2009 from This article dissects the Second Amendment of the United States of America and explains the true intent of the James Madison and his reasoning to include it into the Bill of Rights. The article explains the actual text: “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.” And analyzes the vocabulary Madison chose to compose the Second Amendment in relation to modern day issues on gun control. ......

Words: 547 - Pages: 3

Guns Should Not Be Banned in the Us

...Lanza decided to take the guns of his mother and take the life of 20 children and 8 adults, including his mother's and his own. This atrocity hasn't been the first one. In the weeks since the massacre, gun control supporters have called for a new federal ban on assault weapons and for reductions in the number of concealed-carry permits issued to private citizens. However, to blame assault weapons for this tragedy makes sense like blaming airplanes for the 9-11 attacks. The problem lies with the perpetrator, not the tool used to commit the crime. It is an illusion that further gun control will protect the public since no law, no matter how restrictive, can protect us from people who decide to commit violent crimes. Guns should never be banned in the United States, because the possession of guns ultimately helps improve public safety. Embodied in the Second Amendment to the Constitution is the truth that self-governing individuals should bear the responsibility for defending themselves. The Amendment states, 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. Cramer and Joseph examined the history of pistols in early America that tells us the Framers' original intent in protecting the right of the people to keep and bear arms with no apparent limitations concerning handguns. Many pro gun control supporters adhere to the belief that the availability of guns make violent crime......

Words: 699 - Pages: 3

Gun Control Laws Should Not Be Strengthened

...Gun control laws should not be strengthened, instead they should be enforced. Instead of making it harder for law-abiding citizens to obtain guns, guns should be taken away from unstable individuals or people who should not have guns like criminals. The first reason why gun control should not be strengthened is that citizens have the right to own guns; it is one of those entitlements that makes the United States different from other countries. Secondly, criminals are criminals and that is why they are called criminals, they don’t follow the law; basically if a criminal wants a gun they will get a gun, legally or not. My third reason is that guns are used for protection. Strengthening gun control laws will not prevent violence, guns aren’t the only tool used to hurt people, and people will use other objects to hurt people if they can’t have guns. Without a gun, murderers will still murder people whether they use a gun, knife, baseball bat, or any other object, it doesn’t matter. If not that many citizens have guns thanks to stronger gun laws, what if the government becomes tyrannical or does not protect the citizens’ rights? Well they won’t be able to do anything because they will be helpless, they can’t take out the leaders and fix the government. The second amendment states, “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. Adolf Hitler took away guns from the Jewish people......

Words: 1117 - Pages: 5

Why Citizwns Should Have Guns

...Why Citizens Should Have Guns Those in agreement with strict gun control laws argue that guns are too easy to purchase. One can purchase a firearm at a gun show relative easily. The Bureau of alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives reports that 30 percent of guns involved in federal illegal gun trafficking investigations are connected to gun shows (Project of the City of New York. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. Copyright 2009). It also a fact that guns kills, especially children. Every day, eight American children and teenagers die from gun violence. More than 29,000 people are killed by guns in the U.S. each year. One major reason for these deaths is easy access to guns (Marian Wright Edelman President, Children's Defense Fund). These are very good reasons for stricter gun control laws; however, there are arguments that support the other side of this argument. Data show that the areas of our country with the most draconian restrictions on firearms have the highest levels of crime. Criminals, by definition, break the law. Excessive firearm laws only restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens (New York Times upfront Magazine —U.S. Senator Larry Craig Republican of Idaho). Gun control laws are written to protect the innocent and the law abiding citizen, stricter laws may prove to hurt the very citizens it is designed to protect. We are fortunate to live in a country who’s Founders valued this critical right enough to protect it. They were able to bear......

Words: 275 - Pages: 2

Should Freedom of Speech Be Limited

...Many people think that freedom of speech is a right all humans should have because it allows people to express themselves. That is true, but nobody has ever thought that freedom of speech can actually harm people too. Apart from all the good things freedom of speech brings, people often miss the numerous bad things that freedom of speech brings. Some of these things included using freedom of speech to discriminate, expressing slanderous facts to the public and it can also promote unwanted riots that will cause havoc to a city. I think that freedom of speech should be limited to protect people from harm. Firstly, freedom of speech can be used as a way to discriminate people without consequences. If freedom of speech isn’t limited and anyone can say or express whatever they want, lots of people can pass out booklets discriminating gay people or a certain religion, because they dislike them. Everybody can tell that those people are abusing the freedom of speech, plus they wont receive consequences for doing so if freedom of speech isn’t limited at all. Which is why freedom of speech should be limited in order to protect those people from discrimination. Secondly, freedom of speech allows people to express slanderous opinions or facts just so they can gain trust from the city residents and gain power. Once too many people believe that person, it will be too late to stop and tell the truth because there will be too many people that that believes the lie and wouldn't believe......

Words: 394 - Pages: 2

Gun Rights

...Should all gun owners suffer because of violent gun crimes? Should our rights to bear arms be violated in attempts to prevent these crimes? The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights and its many interpretations lead only to more questions and controversy. Now the Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act (SAFE Act) law has been instated. While the SAFE Act was brought about to prevent horrific crimes like the recent Sandy Hook tragedy, even the legislators “called action on the measure premature.” The law was rushed into place and does not apply to the issues at hand. Guns can be very dangerous; however, it is the people committing these heinous gun crimes that present the problems. Society members should not, as a whole, have to deal with repercussions from a few peoples crimes. Local gun shop owner Dick Decosse sums it up when he says, “Basically, the bad guys get what they want, and the rest of us are paying the price.” While I am personally uncomfortable with guns and do not allow them in my home, I recognize and understand everyone else’s right to make their own choices. The people who commit these reprehensible crimes are not going to be stopped by the new law, especially with the lack of understanding of what exactly the law means. People do not seem to understand the implications of the law or how it might affect them. Questions are being referred to the State Police and even they are saying that “they don’t have any details on the law.”......

Words: 716 - Pages: 3

The Truth About Guns and Rights

...The Truth about Guns and Rights Christine Tarver COM220 February 17, 2013 Lori Pash Amendments amend provisions to the Constitution. The Second Amendment’s provisions are in regard to a militia with the right to bear arms. The word militia is not specifically defined in the Constitution or within the Second Amendment. With no specific definition, this brings about many debates of whose rights these documents protect. The word militia in these terms can be defined as a “general” militia, made up of all able bodied men. This was a check on governmental entities and the belief that people could be protected by individual rights. In 2008, for the first time in American history the Supreme Court defined the right to bear arms. This took place in District of Columbia v. Heller. The Supreme Court stated the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to possess firearms independent of service in a state militia and to use firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, including self-defense within the home. Gun control laws in America are responsible for the possibility of who can or cannot purchase and possess guns; laws also give valid reasons to gun ownership. The right to bear arms has limitations and debates. The second amendment does not protect people against any and every weapon readily available. In fact there are obstacles one must cross before they legally have full ownership of a gun. The rules, regulations, and laws according to this process vary greatly from......

Words: 1545 - Pages: 7

Should Guns Be Banned

...took the lives of twenty students and six teachers at an elementary school in Connecticut (CNN). Horrific, terrifying, and saddening all describe the above-mentioned events. And as would be expected, each one of these events brought forth the question, “Where does the America draw the line between personal freedoms and the safety and well-being of her citizens?” The Second Amendment promises, “[…] the right of people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” But, the recent shooting in Connecticut has caused the extremely emotionally charged arguments both for and against the ban of assault weapons to resurface within the United States Congress. This paper will provide an unbiased presentation of both arguments for and against the ban of assault weapons. Upon objectively presenting both sides of the argument, the paper will then proceed into developing a stance against the ban of assault weapons through the further discussion and elaboration upon the ideas As mentioned before, the Second Amendment specifically states that the ability for an American citizen to own a gun will in no way be infringed upon. This leads to the first argument to be discussed, the argument against the ban of assault weapons within the United States. Opponents of this band rely heavily on the idea that many of the massacres that were discussed earlier in this text did not involve assault weapons; instead they were carried out through the use of handguns rather than rifles or shotguns (The......

Words: 2236 - Pages: 9

Texas Gun Rights

...(TPC 9.32(b)).” Texas also is a “Stand Your Ground” state. This means you do not have to attempt to flee the situation before using justified deadly force. And we have one more important law that goes with those two laws. This is the Civil Immunity law. This law states that “Chapter 86 prohibits a person convicted of a misdemeanor or felony from filing suit to recover any damages suffered as a result of the criminal act or any justifiable action taken by others to prevent it or to apprehend the person.” Texas is a state that enjoys their right to bear arms. So why is a gun loving state one of the few states that still do not allow open carry of handguns? With a Concealed Handgun License, you must keep the gun concealed from the public’s view. If you are caught with your handgun visible to the public you can be fined and/or your license suspended for up to 6 months. It would seem that Texas is trying to change that. At this time right now there are three separate bills in the Texas Legislature trying to change that. House Bill 106 and House Bill 164 are two of the bills in play at the moment. These are very similar bills. They grant the owners of a Texas Concealed Handgun License to carry their weapon unconcealed or concealed. This would still ban them from carrying their handguns into buildings and establishments that are currently on the list of places that one cannot carry a handgun. They include Federal Buildings, Schools, Public sporting events,......

Words: 1178 - Pages: 5

Gun Rights Paper

...Responsible Gun Owners are losing their Rights Ryan T. Kennedy COM/172 November 20, 2013 Oleah Morris Responsible Gun Owners are losing their Rights The gun violence of today in many opinions, is worse than what it was in the “Wild West.” A major contributor, is the actions and crimes of criminals with illegally obtained firearms. Crimes committed with illegally obtained firearms such as robberies, gang shootings, and even murder. The firearm subject has been at the top of several political debates in recent times. This is mostly because of several school tragedies involving innocent children, which have taken place over the last two and a half decades. Some individuals believe that more crime will be prevented, if more law-abiding citizens were armed. Others believe that stronger gun laws are needed. The thesis is, Americans are losing their Second Amendment rights because of criminals with illegally obtained firearms. Has the nation forgotten about the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights, or does this country only care about the first and fifth amendments? The general census is anti-gun activists and the U.S. Government need to put the blame where it belongs, and stop punishing law-abiding citizens. The History of Firearms and the Crimes Committed Many believe it was Leonardo DiVinci who invented the firearm. The fact is, “the first firearm in the world was invented in 13th century China when the man made portable fire lance (a bamboo or metal tube......

Words: 2217 - Pages: 9

Gun Rights

...Anti-Gun Control Gun control is a huge restriction we face as Americans. As time progresses, gun laws get have been getting more strict and serious, thus making it harder for non felons to obtain a permit to carry. Even the Second Amendment gives us as Americans the right to bear arms. Gun control in Indiana is more strict than a lot of other states. In Indiana, in order to carry a hand gun, you must have a concealed carry permit produced by the state of Indiana. In order to obtain the permit you must be at least eight-teen years old and fill out an application, and be fingerprinted. In other states such as Virginia you can simply carry a handgun as long as you are eight-teen and don’t have a felony. You can still get a gun permit in Virginia but until you get one you must open carry the gun, without hiding it. Even though when you turn eighteen you can obtain a gun permit, as eighteen you can’t buy a handgun. However at that age, you can go to a gun store and by any rifle. I think these laws are a little mixed up. I think that if im old enough to carry a hand gun, I should be able to buy one. Guns are not killing people, what kills people is when guns get in the wrong hands. This is the result of our strict gun laws. However other actions could be taken to allow safe people to obtain guns and felons to not. Such actions are being used today including the concealed carry permit process, because it requires a background check. I think the process should be a little more......

Words: 815 - Pages: 4

Gun Rights Paper

...Christian McBride August 23, 2014 EN1420 Guns don’t kill people. It has always been the responsibility of the people to protect themselves, never the responsibility of the government to protect us. It is however the Government’s responsibility to protect the rights of the people, including the right for the people to protect themselves; the Amendment. Gun control is not effective; as it has never been shown in a national study to reduce the number of gun related crimes. If the people do not protect themselves, there is no protection. It has been proven in many other countries in all of which these destinations have very minimal gun laws and restrictions. These countries include Norway, Finland, France and Germany and in all of these countries there is a remarkably lower murder rate, way below the rate of the United States. One of the most widely known colleges in the world, Harvard University conducted a study, with the result of the study being “gun control is proven to be counterproductive”. In the United States, gun control has been a long argued battle of the people’s right to bear arms vs. the law controlling guns. The US Constitution’s Second Amendment reads: “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.” Who is to say that any belong to the “well-regulated Militia” is the general public a Militia. The truth is most Americans do not trust the government, or more...

Words: 589 - Pages: 3

Gun Rights

...Guns Rights Whether or not guns should be allowed to be carried by students into school or college campus is a contentious issue. Though some people haves opinion that students should be permitted to carry guns along with them in schools and colleges so that they can defend themselves from the sudden attacks by intruders and resist attempts of sexual or physical abuse, it should be admitted that such acceptance or permission can only give rise to more complications and violence among the school-goers or college-goers. The proponents of allowing guns in colleges and schools argue that adhering to the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America each and every American should be allowed to keep arms for the reason of self-defense (“SECOND AMENDMENT”, n.d.). The right to self-defense is one of the fundamental rights and as this is so, college or school students should be allowed to carry gun for their self-defense. The rise in the number of shooting crimes committed by mentally unstable youths and adults is enough to justify the point that for protecting themselves from the attacks of perverts, students should be allowed to carry guns while in the school or college campus. But such an argument should not be entertained as it is malicious. School students or college students should never be permitted to carry guns as they are not mature enough to understand when and how to use a gun properly for self-defense. If they are allowed to carry guns then it......

Words: 511 - Pages: 3

Should Guns Be Banned

...“There are hundreds of millions of gun owners in this country, and not one of them will have an accident today. The only misuse of guns comes in environments where there are drugs, alcohol, bad parents, and undisciplined children. Period” (Nugent). There are millions and millions of people who owns guns. That does not mean that guns are bad. Many people argue that guns are too harmful and people should not have the right to own them. However, there are many cases where guns have saved peoples’ lives. It can be argued that they are dangerous or are good devices to have. I believe that guns are beneficial to have because they can help save people’s lives, put food on the table, and they can stop a crime before it happens. My first issue I will talk about to prove my point is a little history about guns. How many people own guns, how many people have them registered, etc. In 2009, in the United States, Americans owned roughly 310 million firearms. The United States population is around 315 million people (Curry). With these numbers, it means that statistically just about every American owns a gun. That is not the case, however, because many Americans own more than only one gun and some own none. They have handguns, rifles, shotguns, etc. and there are many different purposes for each type of gun. While there are a high number of gun owners in America, there were “approximately 8 million active concealed-carry permits in the United States as of the end of 2011” (Curry). Many......

Words: 1803 - Pages: 8

Gun Law Should Be Revoked

...(Persuasive speech: Gun Law Should Be Revoked) By: David Mikombo Submitted To: Professor Keondra Mitchell In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Business Communications Management 3030-801 Online September 12, 2015 As a native African, growing up I always dreamed of coming to America that was the dream that my brothers, my friends and I had. Watching the movies and dreaming of living the American Dream, we were told that America is the best country in the world, the land of opportunities. There is no country like America “Uncle Sam Needs You”, yes my childhood was just filled with the hopes that one day I’d make it to the greatest nation/ empire on the planet. I was told the crime rates and killings were very low and I liked the sound of that. In 2007 God Almighty opened up a way for my family and I to come to America and now that was what you call a dream come true for me. Greetings to you all my name is David Mikombo that was just a background for you all to understand my feelings as to why the “Gun Law” should be revoked. On April 16, 2007, a Virginia Tech student named Seung-Hui Cho shot and killed 32 people, in total he gunned down 56 before he took his own life ( On November 5, 2009, Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan at Fort Hood army base in Texas, fired killing 13 people and wounded 29 ( On August 3, 2010, Omar S. Thornton opened fire at a beer distributor in Manchester,......

Words: 1077 - Pages: 5

1x25 Amar a muerte | 1 rponse | 日本劇