Paper Sample on the Right to Bear Arms - Second Amendment

There have been many debates in the recent past in America related to gun control measures. The increased crime rates in the country have been the sole reason has to why the heated debate to reduce firearms started. However, not every American supported the idea of wiping off the guns from the citizens was a good idea. Second Amendment to the US Constitution states that 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 (Utter, 2015). With this constitutional language, it has become a challenge to amend the scope of the amendment. Many people have had diverse opinions on the subject matter as to why they think disarming the citizens would be the right thing while others totally oppose the idea of disarmament, but either way disarming the citizens would not be the right way to solve some of the gun-related crimes in America.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

America is Safer with Firearms

America is safer with firearms. The sole purpose the gun was created was to take away the lives of people or rather scare them. Gun existence does not figure into the equation of the safety of a place. It is a fact that there are places without guns like Chicago, but the security of the citizens is still a matter of great concern (Lott, 2013). In the same effect, there are places with many guns in the hands of the citizens like in the most dangerous cities in America, but safety levels are still low. There are so many ways that an evil person can use to commit crimes and not just by the utilization of a gun. Thus, disarming the citizens of their guns does not guarantee more safety in America.

Pros and Cons of the Right to Owning Firearms

There are quite several pros and cons of owning a firearm. Starting off with the negatives, it is essential to own a gun in America based on the high US population especially due to a large number of people who have no manners and boundaries. Guns owned by the police officers are the ones that help arrest criminals without incidents, and so does the effect of any other gun belonging to other citizens. It is a bit hard for an offender to start harassing people when he or she already know that there are high chances of the victims carrying a gun. Guns protect the weak population since they can defend themselves when attacked by the criminals (Lott, 2013). A burglar would have to think twice before storming into a house of a person whom the law allows owning a gun. By people owning firearms, the levels of insecurity reduce when the criminals know that they too are in danger of losing their lives.

Despite the many advantages of owning a firearm, there are several disadvantages associated with this right. In the recent years, reports on cases of homicide have short up, and this has been aided by the guns which the homicide victims prefer to use when committing suicide since gun death is faster with little complications like may be using a rope. Guns cannot differentiate between innocent bystanders and criminals, depicting that accidental shooting are possible and a common occurrence (Krueger & Mehta, 2015). Children have also been reported to mishandle their parents guns at home even when the parents have tried so hard to hide the firearms. The presence of a gun at home affects the safety of the children at a higher level. In most of the teenage shooting cases, the teens have confessed that most of the guns they use are actually from their homes.

Why Our Forefathers Included the Right to Bear Arms in the Second Amendment

The right to own a firearm was ratified in 1791 in the second amendment of the American constitution (Utter, 2015). The amendment states that the rights of the citizens to own a firearm in a free state shall not be infringed. The amendment was ratified so as to give the state militia more power. The amendment was however created to give the American citizens an opportunity to fight back and defend themselves against the tyrannical federal government, the British, which the US had just finished warding off. The right to own a firearm is depicted in the constitution just like any other right. By the time our founding fathers amended this constitutional right, the US military was not the same size as the modern one, hence ownership of guns by the citizens was of great help to counter attacks from the British (Utter, 2015). The fear that the British would stage another attack was the mentality behind the right to own the firearms.

Whether Crime Will Lower with Firearms Removal

Gun removal is not the absolute solution to crimes in our country. The second Amendment guarantees the American citizens the right to own a gun, thus disarming citizens would be a violation of a constitutional right which is a right like any other. There are better and appropriate approaches that can be used to counter crimes in America, and the removal of guns is not one of them. When more people carry guns to protect themselves, less of the violent crimes will be reported. After all, it is not the guns that kill people but rather the individuals who kill each other. On the contrary, the banning of the firearms ownership will be increasing the crime rates since the weak in the society will be exposed and be vulnerable to the evil people in the community (Lott, 2013). The criminals can and always use illegal means to smuggle, and import guns from other countries hence disarming the citizens will be just a matter of time before the criminals import other firearms to continue the crimes.

There are better alternative methods to reduce crime rates in America, and one of them would be imposing mandatory sentences to criminals who are found committing crimes with the use of firearms. The biggest challenges that are associated with committing a crime with guns is that the offenders are only sentenced short time in prison which does not teach them the lesson of their lives. Hence when they get out of jail, they continue with the crimes since the prison term did not make much impact in their misconduct. There are also other underlying factors that prompt criminals to use guns in committing crimes like drug abuse and poverty. Instead of banning guns, the government should work to solve the underlying problems, and through this, the crime rate will reduce. Removal of guns will only give more confidence to criminals who will commit crimes knowing that the victims cannot harm them, and this will instill fear in the citizens since they cannot acquire a gun to protect themselves as the law forbids it, and more so being exposed to all sort of crimes (Lott, 2013).

Effects Firearms Have Had on America

America is the leading country in firearm ownership. The impacts to firearms ownership in America have been both positive and negative. Adverse effects of gun ownership include the massive toll of gun-related deaths which has been high. For instance, in 2009, gun related deaths mounted up to 30, 000 within that year only. Guns have also been involved in more than 68% of homicide deaths in the United States (Krueger & Mehta, 2015). Innocent children and citizens have lost their lives in gun-related cases, and this is aided by the fact that using a gun to kill or cause injury to other people is a faster than the use of other means like strangling, using ropes or hands. The loss of Productive individuals in the society has affected the economy negatively, not only in the present state but also in the future due to the young children and adults who pass away in gun related crimes.

Despite the negative impacts of firearms in America, there are also positive impacts the firearms have been associated with in America. The anti-gun biases have been fuelled by the urban elite with unsubstantial personal experience in gun issues who write for influential newspapers. Incarcerated felons admit to refraining from homes that they suppose the owners have guns since they fear being injured, and this has positively impacted in the reduction of crime cases (Krueger & Mehta, 2015). Individuals with guns have also aided in the capture of criminals since the police are mostly not at the crime scene when it happens but the citizens. Law enforcement cannot be at all the places; hence guns give residents a sense of security. Business owners have been able to protect their businesses, and this has increased economic activities and ability for people to expand their businesses with no fear of losing their properties and wealth to thieves. Prevalence of other crimes like rape has also gone down since women and can protect themselves against such sex assaulters.

Ethical Evaluation of Right to Bear Firearms

Firearm ownership amongst the Americans is a moot issue since the subject has both positive and adverse effects and impacts. Both sides for and against the right of gun ownership make sense. Thus it would be appropriate to say that American is safer with and also without firearms (Utter, 2015). It is not the guns that are an issue here but the morals of people and reactions towards their fellow human beings. Firearms are nothing but catalysts to the atrocities that people commit towards each other. If the government is determined on curbing crimes in the society, then the focus should be on the actual and underlying actors but not use the issue of firearms to diverge the real problems. Unethical crimes like drug abuse, lack of jobs as well as poverty are some of the main topics that prompt people to turn to crime. Once these main problems are tackled like providing jobs for people, burglars will have no reason to go stealing from others and shooting innocent people in the process. However, if the debates on disbarment keep going on, then the real pressing issues will end up being overlooked, and crimes will never cease from increasing.

Consequences of Firearm being taken away in the United States

Over the past few years, gun ownership has been on the rise to the forefront of public consciousness. Most debates focused on the regulation of gun and in keeping deadly weapons out of the hands of potential killers like the mental disturbed. This is the reason why most people are for the mainstream issue on gun ownership whereby they claim that gun control should be more emphasized (Kovandzic, Schaffer, & Kleck, 2012). The media have been focusing on the number of people who are killed by guns either by being gunned down or also by accident. A lot of children have been reported to having firearms that have been improperly stored with many deranged individuals who go on a shooting spree. Taking firearms away have itself been accompanied by consequences in the American society with it influencing the behavior of the criminals.

Most consequences of taking away firearms have gone unreported, but they are much significant. Taking firearms have been considered to influence people behavior especially the criminals (Kovandzic, Schaffer, & Kleck, 2012). Criminals have been found to fear armed citizens more than they have been reported to fear police and if individuals are made to give that away, then the criminals would have an easy task. Most of the purpose for this to happens is prominent, but police are rarely on site during a crime.

Criminals tend to disappear by the time the police arrive. The other reason why criminals fear armed citizens more than police is the fact that police have been bound by policies and procedures and are only trained to use their firearms if it deems necessary (Kovandzic, Schaffer, & Kleck, 2012). A citizen faced by a criminal and is armed will do what it takes to protect themselves since they are not bound by any procedure.

Research done indicated that in an interview of over 18000 incarcerated felons, and their opinion on citizen gun ownership, thirty percent of the crimi...