Should The Constitution Protect Private Gun Ownership

? Essay, Research Paper Erik Castaldo Term Paper Should the constitution protect private gun ownership? Should the Constitution protect private gun ownership? This is an

? Essay, Research Paper

Erik Castaldo

Term Paper

Should the constitution protect private gun ownership?

Should the Constitution protect private gun ownership? This is an

arguable question with two developed sides dating back to when the

constitution was written and the second amendment was developed.

After the American revolutionary war in the seventeen hundreds, our

new country needed a basis of government, rules, rights and ideals.

The fathers of our country wrote these rules and regulations which there

was an unanimous agreement on. They named this writing “The

Constitution of the United States of America.” One right the constitution

gave the people was the second amendment written in 1791 which

stated. ” A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a

free state, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

There are controversies about this amendment, however. In the

present, the second amendment and private gun ownership is said to

be hurting our citizens rather than protecting them. This is an arguable

statement, however. Several major court cases have had an impact on

private gun ownership since the second amendment was written.

These cases forced additional rules to apply to private gun ownership

to make it safer.

The citizens whom appose private gun ownership feel that the

second amendment has no real meaning in the present and it was only

written to ensure our freedom and undeveloped country from hostile

take over. America is a now a strong world power and the threat our

new country had is obviously past tense now. They also feel that guns

have a better chance of hurting people rather than helping someone

and making guns obsolete will solve the problem of most homicides.

Statistics show that hand guns are the most common weapon seen in

homicides across the nation and some states which do not allow

private gun ownership have much lower homicide rates than we do

here in America. Guns also rank among the highest accidental deaths.

The people against private gun ownership wish to completely ban

guns from all people. This would most definitely lower homicide rates

in America just as it did in other countries but it is unfair to the

American people who safely use guns for sport or collecting.

Americans who are pro private gun ownership think that without

guns, there wouldn’t be an America. Many people see guns as a way

to protect their loved ones, valuable items and property. Guns are used

in many ways for recreational activities such as target shooting and

hunting. They believe that it is a freedom that came along with the

country and should not be taken away.

In my opinion the rights of the second amendment should not be

taken away. I have many examples of how private gun ownership is

beneficial to people but couldn’t find any which show that it is a con on

society that had a background other than peoples stupidity,

misjudgment and being unsafe.

House jacking in Florida. A 49 year old male with Parkinson’s

disease. Fatally wounded a criminal whom was breaking in through his

glass sliding doors with a legal handgun.

The Times 5/6/00

Man stops Bronco theft by threatening with handgun, no shots fired,

in Pennsylvania.

Butler Eagle 4/20/00

A woman’s separated husband, armed with a butchers knife forced

his way into her home in Kent, Washington. The woman’s male

companion was armed and fatally shot the would be murderer with a

legal firearm.

Tri-City Herald 8/17/00

A 60 year old Las Vegas home owner was awakened by his

barking dog at 1 A.M. Armed with his legal handgun, the man

investigated. Opening the door to his den, he encountered an armed

intruder. A gun battle ensued and the legal gun owner came out on top.

The police arrived and captured a fleeing accomplice outside. Inside

they found a handgun, still in the dead mans hand. The invader had a

long record for burglary and battery.

Las Vegas review-Journal 7/19/00

Don’t blame the inanimate gun for the actions of armed violent

felons. Concerned law abiding gun owners agree with our founding

fathers who know that freedom depends on the right to keep and bear

arms. For every soldier who fought for liberty we owe thanks and

gratitude. Its sad to think that there is a force intending to take away

our constitutional firearms rights. Instead of concentrating on reporting

accidental incidents or parental lack of responsibility the media should

focus on the wrong doings and phony two-faced actions of the anti

gunners. Instead highlight the shooting sports as an American tradition.

There is a need for the mainstream population to hear the stories of

those who have used guns for self protection and survived the

onslaught of vicious criminals who would have robbed and killed their

victims had they not been armed.

The hypocrisy of anti-right to bear arms individuals who are

exposed with hired armed bodyguards are insidious. How easy for our

enemies to overtake us unarmed. What are the antigun politicians

thinking? That the rest of the world loves America and wouldn’t dream

of military occupation because were defenseless? How stupid! In the

real world the reason the USA is a number one power is because of

our superior firepower. The same concept keeps armed citizens safe

from an increasingly violent and unpredictable environment.

Responsible law abiding citizens who legally own guns, who keep

them safe for sport and protection are rightfully exercising a privilege

that America, freedom and liberty stand for. To remove this

fundamental amendment would be a nail in the coffin for democracy.

Since Britain banned and confiscated all legally owned handguns in

1997, gun crime has gone up. Eighty years ago, England effectively

had no antigun laws at all. Gun crime was statistically insignificant. A

former police superintendent said in 1973, “As each anti gun law

passes, gun crime steadily grows worse. It stands to reason that the

same course of action would render the same results here. If the police

are allowed to be armed for self protection shouldn’t the people?

“Guns protect families, gun haters ignore the real causes of crime”

In conclusion, I think that instead of new antigun laws, enforce zero

tolerance for illegal possession and 100% prosecution of criminals who

use guns. We should monitor gun purchases and resales from gun

dealers. Finding and eliminating “black market” gun dealers would be

a huge and effective step. Establishing good safety programs

necessary for citizens to pass in order to get a gun license would be

another good precaution. One last thing would be to mandate

proficiency tests for licensed individuals to prove that they can adeptly