Restrictions on Gun Ownership

Running Head RESTRICTIONS ON GUN OWNERSHIP Are at that place any Legitimate Re unforgivingions on Gun Ownership? Steve PHI103 Informal Logic The south Amendment of the get together States administration gives the citizens of America the decent of the large number to bear harness. This was adopted with the rest of the flyer of Rights. However, with this being say in that location are state that take this the right way to heart, and they feel they should be able to buzz off any flatulency they want. at that place are shoots that are specific everyy designed for forces, some local or suppose practice of law enforcement and are illegal for the average someone to own. in that location are a lot of Federal and state laws that excite to be met prior to anyone purchasing and therefore, owning a gas pedal. There are safety laws that have been put in blank to keep hit mans forth of the hands of convicted felons, children, and the mentally handicapped as well as other (a) irresponsible people that may have the cleverness to infract or kill another(prenominal) human being. There are also certain criteria a person pass on have to meet before the purchase of a submarine sandwich will go through. A gun owner go throughs what it takes to kill and those somebodys know there should be different forms of gun control measures to help maintain accidents from occurring.As the saying goes Guns dont kill people, people do. The legal community of accidents is only when one condition for supporting gun control. Another reason to support gun control is to prevent the people already mentioned from having the ability to get a gun that can be used to injure or intimidate people. Better enforcement of the many gun laws we have in place currently should be the priority of the state and local law enforcement agencies. Commandeering someones gun or extremely over-the-top gun laws are not the answers to fixing the gun problems we are lawsuitd with today. str ictly enforcing current laws, we have in place now is the answer. The U. S. Supreme cost in a 5-4 vote on Thursday June 26, 2008 declared for the first off time that Second Amendment to the U. S. Constitution guaranteed the rights of soulfulness Americans to bear and keep arms. They give tongue to that the ownership of a gun is a right of the individual, not intertwined with military lick, and that it can be regulated in some ways, (2008, June 26) Furthermore, this feeling came out of Washington D. C field that had a security guard sued the zone for prohibiting him from keeping his handgun at his home.In D. C. , it is a offence to stockpile an unregistered firearm, and registration of a handgun is prohibited. The rules for handguns are so strict that they regulate handguns out of existence. These rules are put in place to bear witness and curb violence with handguns in the nations capital. This ruling furthermore struck gloomy this ban on inbuilt grounds, stating it f lew in the face of our thoroughgoing right to bear arms, (2008, June 26) The case in D. C. also It was also say that the two sides in this case thought processed the Founding Fathers intentions of the Amendment rights very different.For the most part the majority of the Supreme Court Justices said that this amendment protected the individuals right to own a gun without connection with the service in a militia and to use this for a lawful conception such as self-defense in the home. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not un especial(a). It is not a right to keep and assoil any weapons whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatsoever purpose, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the majority. But it did allow for individuals to have guns for lawful purposes, such as hunting and defending themselves, he said.The majority clearly saw the individual right to own a gun, (2008, June 26) This ruling left in place many restrictions at some(prenominal) the federal and st ate levels, like the bans that were placed on felons right to have a gun, and the bans on sawed-off toolguns and assault weapons. Justice John Paul Stevens stated that this ruling would leave it up to future acts to in reality define the details of the right to bear arms. He also stated that this should be the business of state legislatures, and that the court should stay out of this.Lastly, he stated that the law-abiding citizen will be able to keep a gun at home, moreover that it doesnt address how the different states legislatures will want to regulate gun ownership. In another statement by Justice Stephen Breyer he stated that in his view there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the category in crime-ridden urban areas, (2008, June 26) This was a topic for debate between the 2008 classless and republican presidential office runners.Senator McCain stated Todays ruling makes clear that other municipali ties like sugar that have banned handguns have infringed on the constitutional rights of Americans, he said. He also took a thinly veiled shot at the presumptive Democratic nominee, Sen. Barack Obama by saying Unlike the elitist view that believes Americans cling to guns out of bitterness, todays ruling recognizes that gun ownership is a primitive right sacred, just as the right to free speech and assembly. presidential nominee Barack Obama responded to this ruling by stating that Todays ruling, the first clear statement on this issue in 127 years, will provide much-needed guidance to local jurisdictions crossways the country, he said, adding that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne, merely the purpose reinforced that if we act responsibly, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe, (2008, June 26) It would save be fair to state that the crime rate has plummeted since the Supreme court made its decision on the Second Amendment.The table below shows just the Chicago data and as you can see there is a decline, (2011, Oct 4). When this was first looked at the thought was that if there were more guns out there that this would cause crime to increase, but this has been proven to be false. This stat bears the question of where there fewer crimes because the citizens are now gun owners, and the criminals are aware of this. Do you think it is because the criminals business the laws? I do not think it is because they fear the laws.I authentically believe that these criminals are thinking in the ski binding of their mind that if they try to commit a crime against someone who could be armed, and they will retaliate by shooting them in self-defense. This may really make a criminal rethink this act before he/she commits the crime. Furthermore, I think the fact that the victim might be so scared and could shoot without thinking and possibly killing the perpetrator truly has the perpetrator t hinking of this unknown factor, and that makes them more cautious about committing the crime in the first place.The following is a chart for the crime evaluate from 2009-2010, (2010, Dec. 20). As you can see that not only did the rates change over in Chicago but the one below is for the United States as a whole. It was said that the The Supreme Court breathed new carriage into the amendment when it struck work through strict handgun bans in Washington and Chicago and spoke of the inherent right of self-defense. But to the dismay of gun rights advocates, adjudicate in recent months have read those decisions narrowly and jilted claims from those who said they had a constitutional right to submit a loaded gun on their person or in their car.Instead, these judges from California to atomic number 101 have said the core right to a gun is limited to the home. Now, the National Rifle Assn. is asking the high court to take up the issue this fall and correct the widespread misapprehe nsion that the 2nd Amendments mount does not extend beyond the home. Stephen Halbrook, an NRA lawyer, said some judges have buried their heads in the sand and have refused to go one pace further than saying there is a right to have a gun at home. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence hailed the trend and called the high courts rulings a hollow victory for gun enthusiasts. The gun buttonhole has tried to expand the 2nd Amendment into a broad right to carry any type of gun anywhere. And they have been almost unanimously rejected by the courts, said Jonathan Lowy, director of legal action. He conceded, however, that this battle is cold from over. The uncertainty began with the Supreme Court itself. In 2008, Justice Antonin Scalia said the biography of the 2nd Amendment shows it guarantees the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation. But other parts of his 5-4 opinion stressed there is no right to carry any weapon in any manner, and that bans on carrying concealed weapons were lawful in the 19th century (Savage, D, 2011) The following stats provided by the FBI provide ammunition on the Supreme Courts decision on the second Amendment. It stated that Despite a grinding recession, account crime in the United States continues to fall, the FBI said Monday. ruby-red crime was down 6 percent in 2010 the fourth consecutive yearly decline, fit to the FBIs Uniform Crime Report.Property crime dropped for the eighth year in a row, down 2. 7 percent in 2010. In Pennsylvania, barbaric crime fell 3 percent and property crime ticked down 0. 5 percent. New Jersey and Delaware reported small drops in dotty crime, but increases in property crime, (Moran, R. 2011). These stats show that right to bear arms did not have a negative effect on the recession. As I read all the articles and stories while doing my research for this paper, I commence that the restrictions imposed on gun ownership appear to infringe on our Second Amendment rights provided to us by the U. S. Constitution.I also feel that there should definitely be some sort of control on guns, but we should not do this at the expense of what the Founding Fathers wrote in the U. S. Constitution. As what has been previously covered in this paper the mentally ill, convicted felons, or people that have been convicted of violent crimes should be the only ones that are exempt from owning a gun, and I truly feel that this is for the safety of our citizens here in the United States. Furthermore, I think that states should not impose such restrictions and deny all of that states people the right to own a gun.This is not only a direct irreverence of that persons Second Amendment rights but also a violation of a persons right to due process infra the 14th amendment. Lastly, I truly believe that the extreme laws or gun confiscations are illegal under the US Constitution and these do not work to stop crimes. Reference Anonymous,. The FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation . The Latest Stats prove a Continuing Decline in Crime Preliminary biyearly Uniform Crime Report, January-June, 2010 (2010,December , 20).Retrieved from http//www. bing. com/images/search? q=FBI+Crime+Rate+ insurance coverageview=detailid=F22BCC735FB3184B04D1C2B36F350ED63CBD086Ffirst=0FORM=IDFRIR Anonymous,. SUPREME judicature ENDORSES NEW VIEW OF SECOND AMENDMENT Protection. (2008,September). Criminal Justice Newsletter,3. Retrieved from http//proquest. umi. com/pqdweb? index=6did=1646334181SrchMode=1sid=7Fmt=2VInst=PRODVType=PQDRQT=309VName=PQDTS=1322524094clientId=74379 Lott, J. 2011, Oct 4) Chicagos Violent Crime Rates Plummet After SCOTUS Removes Handgun Ban. Andrew Breitbart Presents BIG GOVERNMENT. Retrieved from http//biggovernment. com/jlott/2011/10/04/chicagos-violent-crime-rates-plummet-after-scotus-removes-handgun-ban/ Moran, R (2011, September20). Crime rates continue to fall, FBI reports. McClatchy Tribune Business News. Retrieved from http//proquest. umi. com/pqdw eb? index=0did=2460748471SrchMode=1sid=2Fmt=3VInst=PRODVType=PQDRQT=309VName=PQDTS=1324404944clientId=74379