Blog #123 – Debate over the 2nd Amendment
While we study the making of the Constitution and the creation of the Bill of Rights (BOR), I wanted to spend some time examining an application of this infomation in the real world. The debate over the right to bear arms has been a contentious one ever since mass shootings began to increase in frequency beginning in the late 1990s. There were a few major gun regulations passed in the 1990s – The Brady Bill in 1993 (a mandatory waiting period for buyers of hand guns along with background checks) and an assault weapons ban in 1994 (which expired in 2004), but nothing major has been passed since. Probably within the past six years or so, the debate over gun control, gun-owners’ rights, and the causes for the numbers of mass shootings have been hotly argued.
Here is the text of the 2nd Amendment:
“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.”
In 1995, the Supreme Court decided a pivotal case, U.S. v. Lopez. Alfonso Lopez was a senior who took a concealed gun into his high school. The state charges against him were dropped, and he was tried on federal charges of violating the Gun Free School Zones Act. His lawyers challenged his guilty verdict because schools are normally controlled by state and local governments, not the federal government. The conservative majority of the Court found that Congress cannot make gun laws using its Commerce Clause powers, fearing the spread of unregulated federal power.
For most of American history, the 2nd Amendment had been interpreted by the Supreme Court that gun ownership had been allowed as long as the owner was part of a local or state militia (as established in U.S. v. Miller, 1939). In 2008, the Supreme Court disconnected gun ownership’s link to a local or state militia in the case, D.C. v. Heller. In the District of Columbia, the district had passed a law that required hand gun owners to either lock their hand guns in a safe or keep them unloaded and disassembled in a person’s home. In Heller, the Supreme Court felt that laws that prevented guns being owned by the mentally ill, carried in schools and churches, and laws on the sale of firearms were all allowed. However, D.C. v. Heller “held that the Amendment guarantees an individual right to possess a firearm in the home for self-defense, and struck down the handgun possession ban as well as the safe storage law (which had no exception for self-defense).” Essentially, an individual’s right to gun ownership has nothing to do w/ a person’s membership in a militia (an outdated notion by 2008).
Within the past 2 months, sparked by the two mass shootings on a Saturday in August, there has been a great tumult over the availability of assault weapons for the general public. Democratic presidential candidate, Beto O’Rourke, has even gone so far as to say that if he were elected president, he would institute a mandatory buy-back of AK-47s and AR-15s, common assault weapons owned by some Americans.
Here is the history of the 2nd Amendment, done by the History Channel:
Here is a video on gun control from the liberal perspective:
And here is a video on gun control from the conservative perspective:
Your job:
- First, provide your initial views on gun control.
- Watch the 3 videos, take notes on each of their arguments and assertions, and then make your own determination.
- Has your view changed now knowing the history of the 2nd Amendment and hearing from both sides of the gun debate? Why or why not?
I strongly believe the usage of assault/military-grade weaponry by civilians is dangerous and counteractive to it being used for self-defense. However, the use of handheld guns/hunting rifles is a Constitutional right that should not be taken away. There can be stricter laws on the selling of guns both privately and publicly to ensure the safety of the public. Banning all guns from people wouldn’t help anyone. One because it would be against our Second Amendment rights. Two because this would just lead to more sales on the black market which would only cause more dangerous people to own guns. I also think that if you were to ever purchase a gun you would have to go through safety training classes to learn to conceal your weapon properly in public (if the law allowed) and at home. Everyone should have the right to bear arms but, if this right infringes on the safety and wellbeing of others it should be restricted or taken away.
My views on gun laws haven’t really changed that much after watching the videos. The only thing that has really changed is the fact that universal background checks aren’t that effective. Which has helped me to understand that licensing would be a more helpful method of preventing the wrong people from obtaining guns. As talked about in the VOX video many mass shooters have made it through background checks because FBI databases aren’t up to date. Why would FBI databases not be up to date? They are vital in the distribution of knowledge about threats. Yet, only twelve states in the United States have established a licensing system. The licensing system is lengthy but, stops uneligible and dangerous people to own firearms. Like in the VOX video it would also prevent more impulse buys to delay more suicides (at the very least). If the licensing system was established nationally it would help in the gradual decrese in gun-related deaths. The use of firearms in modern times is less essential compared to when the Second Amendment was created. When the Second Amendment was first initiated we didn’t have an army and the people were so used to defending themselves. Now we have a stronger military power that can protect us from foreign affairs and domestic troubles like the founding fathers intended. So the need for weapons is less of a necessity because we have a secure military and police system to protect citizens.
Before I watched the videos on gun control, I was against the second amendment, the right to bear arms. This amendment only caused violence between people who used this amendment to own guns for the wrong reasons. It gave people not enough restriction with deadly weapons. All of these mass shootings are caused because of this amendment, if we had people not to have the right to bear arms, these shootings would mostly have been prevented.
Some people may argue that the right to bear arms are a positive because it increases personal protection. That argument is true since violence is thriving due to the right to bear arms. Although if there were no guns in the first place, then you would not need to worry about protection using guns. Protection can be used by other items than just guns. Therefore the second amendment, the right to bear arms, should be excluded from the Bill of Rights.
The only acception for a person to own a gun would be someone in the military or one who served in the military because they served our country to protect it, we have to trust them to continue protecting the United States. There is no purpose for anyone else to own a gun other than to hunt or go to the shooting range. If that is the case, they need to add more strict requirements and background checks on people before they buy a gun.
After I watched the videos on gun control, I still am against the second amendment, the right to bear arms. This amendment was first established to get more participation in the militia, when they were in need of more people to be apart of it. Now in present time, we have a very strong army and don’t need an amendment to bear arms for people to join the army. Also, if we were to keep this amendment and just add background checks, it would not help. Dangerous people can still get guns other ways by buying them off of people or from a private sale of guns. Instead, we should use licensing check to get a deeper check on who you are and if you are safe to own a gun. Although it is still not safe enough because dangerous people can still find other ways to get a gun. Rather than keeping this amendment and adding a licensing check to make it a safer way for people to own a gun, the government should just get rid of this amendment fully and not worry about violence and guns.
There are many big problems in our country today from immigration to abortion. One very heated topic that is debated constantly is gun control. My initial opinion on gun control is that obviously if it was absolutely impossible to get a gun and they never existed, then they should be illegal. But since that will never happen, I don’t think that they should be completely illegal because there will always be people that will want to have guns for their own protection or other reasons. Although, I do think that there should be more regulations when buying guns as well as more help for people with mental disorders who are not properly treated. After watching the videos, I still feel the same way. I have thought about this issue a lot and I feel like completely getting rid of guns all at once would not be the most beneficial thing for our nation. Maybe in the future that would be possible but I think right now our country, being so divided, would not take outlawing guns very well and it would cause lots of conflict. I realize the second amendment was created at a time where people did not want guns for acts of terorism or abuse the power as it is today, but I feel that taking guns away would do more harm than good in the long run. I also feel like there should be better help for people with mental illness and we should talk more about how to help people or notice signs of when something might not be right. In adition,, I think our nation needs to do a better job of creating gender equality. The majority of mass shootings are committed by white, middle aged men, I feel like a lot of these men are insecure with the fact that they aren’t “manly enough” and as a society we need to do a better job dealing with gender norms. I also feel gun regulations should be more strictly enforced and stronger background tests should be completed as well as mental tests. In addition, I think that automatic- semi automatic rifles should be illegal because I see no reason why anyone would need that type of gun for any reason.Guns are definitely a huge problem and something needs to be done to prevent these horrific events from happening when guns are in the wrong hands.
My initial views before the videos regarding guns and gun control are as follows, I believe in the protection of the second amendment. I think that Americans should have the right to own a gun if it is in the use of protection, hunting or recreation/target shooting. I think that there should be certain laws/checks that address mental illness and past records of aggression or crime. I believe in the use of handguns in self-defense but in terms of full-auto personally, I don’t think they are as necessary. I believe that gun control laws do not prevent criminals from obtaining guns. If the U.S did put major restrictions on the buying of guns it might result in an increase in smuggling of guns would occur for people who still want to want to obtain guns illegally. This may only delay the process of getting a gun but will not eliminate the problem. These laws/ restrictions won’t change the mindset of someone who wants to inflict harm onto others or them selfs. Personally I think that background checks should become more efficient as some records are lost and this is very dangerous if there are faults or workarounds in that system.
After watching the videos my views had mainly stayed the same. I had known the history of the second amendment and its purpose. I did learn more about more recent supreme court trails and more about the conflicting points on gun control. In the second video, I learned about a possible solution and I agree with the sense of having better checks of mental illness. I also agree that just because a person has yet to do something bad doesn’t mean they won’t in the future. I feel as too many restrictions can mask the purpose of the second amendment as the right to bear arms and shall not be infringed. In terms of banning all guns, I agree with the last video that it is impossible to ban guns that were proposed in the ban in Australia. In America, there are just too many guns to do it.
In terms of the number of gun deaths, the vast number of them are suicides. 4.46 deaths from homicide and 7.1 deaths from suicide per 100,000 people. https://www.gunpolicy.org. If the U.S has more gun control laws it doesn’t prevent people from committing suicide in some other form. I think we should focus on more help on changing the minds of people at risk for suicide.
Initial Thoughts: My thoughts before watching this trio of videos on control include that of assault rifle bans along with strengthened back round checks. People with a mental illness should never be allowed to own a gun! My opinions on control as of right now for the most part represent the point of view that i’ve heard from my parents. To this point in my life I have mostly heard from one side of the argument, the more liberal views of gun bans and very strict gun control laws. My various views may be viewed by many as naive. I am for almost any obstacle between people and obtaining a gun for although many argue that people kill people, not guns, I feel that although that is true in a sense, that a gun is necessary for mass shootings. You cannot run around with a kitchen knife and kill hundreds. They would escape. Yet people today with automatic guns can fire into a crowd and produce numerous fatalities. I am not in a position to fully comprehend a life where a gun is a necessity but for people in some positions a gun is truly needed for self defense. Despite the argument of self defense this I feel that our government is not doing enough to protect its citizens. Too many acts of aggression are not based on defense nowadays. As of right now I would support a buy back of firearms, especially a mandatory one. I feel this would eat up a large chunk of firearms. I especially feel that all types of assault rifles should remain on the battlefield and will support any hurdles faced by buyers of these weapons of destruction.
Post-Video Thoughts- My thoughts post-videos have been altered but the base idea remains the same. The main difference is that now more of a plan has developed in my brain. In the Vex video the point that most caught my attention was about what occurred once Connecticut put their licensing system in place. Gun violence within the state dropped by a staggering amount. I feel that a universal licensing system should be put into place. The system, as it did in Connecticut, would help limit those acting off of impulse along with dangerous people from obtaining a firearm. As of right now back round checks are outdated and quick, making it very possible to sneak by. The three week licensing process is very different from this. Its back round checks include with local law inforcement and an application sent to the local police department. I still stand by my arguments about assault weapons. But the videos did help me see how difficult it would be for any form of firearm ban with hundreds of millions of guns in the United States. Also, I am now even more critical of politicians with powers to inflict change. We may need to start smaller than I would like because of opposition but still hundreds of politicians have failed to place a speedbump in the gun supply system (make the gun market smaller) or gun control in general. Overall, I feel that common sense gun laws (assault rifles), licensing, and a possible gun buy back should be implemented.
Before videos:
My views on gun control are kind of mixed up. I do believe that people have the right to bear arms for protection, but there is always that idea that contradicts, where if there weren’t any or as many guns, we wouldn’t have these mass shootings, and we wouldn’t to feel as if we need a weapon for protection. However, I believe that there is no way to break away from the acquisition of guns. We can’t stop the people from buying guns and we can’t get rid of them. With the mass shootings occurring, however, there clearly need to be something implemented that gives strict policies on the whole action receiving and holding a gun, but I just can’t think of anything that would really be effective.
After videos:
Learning about the history of the 2nd Amendment, some of its purposes still stand today of course which is to protect from tyranny or mass disruption. Unfortunately, the use of guns today have gone against that concept. Today, guns are used by the people against people in homicide, mass homicide or suicide. There needs to be something to fix that and after watching the two videos on different arguments, there is a lot that I agree with.
In the Vox video, they explained background checks and universal background checks that will no have an effect on gun control, which I instantly agreed with, because after learning how the background checks work, I wondered about the people who aren’t exactly dangerous and aren’t exactly law-abiding before they mentioned it in the video. I agree that background checks are not efficient in acknowledging those type of people. Once those type of people get their hands on a gun, then they will and obviously could do something bad. Then, the video explained the licensing system which is a 3 week process where majority of people pass (in Massachusetts). The stats the the video gave proved that the system is effective, but I question if it will work for all states, and if the test is easy to pass or fake. I also question how the process of the licensing system is able to opt out the “in between” people.
There were a couple of things that I agreed with in the Pragen video as well. For example, Metzenbaum saying “if you don’t ban all guns, you might as well ban none of them.” To me, that’s just common sense, but when explaining the offering of insurance of only getting rid of the “bad” guns that somewhat made sense to me but any type of gun can do great damage towards a group that is defenseless/gunless. I didn’t really understand the conservative views all that well in the video, but overall, my opinion on gun control still stands; it’s still undecided and mixed up.
My view on the issue of gun control is that guns do need to be regulated. The USA has had a lot of mass shootings because someone can walk into a gun store, get a not extensive background check, then two weeks later, said person has a semi-automatic rifle. I believe that guns need to be regulated by putting in three laws in place. The first law should state that gun stores or hunting stores should not be able to sell military-grade weaponry. There is no need for a person who hunts to own a semi-automatic rifle. Some people might say they need it for self-defense. What can a semi-automatic rifle do that a pistol can not? They both can be used for self-defense. Also, it is a lot harder to have a mass shooting if the person only has a pistol. The second law should be that all states should make the requirement of having a gun license to own a gun. The process of going through and getting a gun license is about three weeks long. a person trying to get a gun license has to go through a thorough background check by the government, followed by a gun safety class, which the person has to pass. As well as a psychological test by a professional psychiatrist.
After watching all three videos my opinion has not changed at all. The first video talks about the history of guns and the Second Amendment from the colonial era to the modern era. The second video talks about how guns can be controlled via background checks as well as implementing a licensing system to keep guns out of dangerous people’s hands. The video provided evidence that implementing a licensing system cuts down on homicides and suicides involving guns. The third video really sparked my interest, the video talks about how the attempts at gun bans have failed in very liberal states, California and Massachusetts. Also how there is no great amount of support of gun bans. The video talks about how Australia put a ban on all semi-automatic rifles. Australia destroyed 700,000 semi-automatic rifles. Then the video goes into talking about how if the united states did that there will still be 200 million guns in the United States. Then the video goes into how if we do put regulations on guns that there still will be a high rate of gun crime. The third video made me think a bit. Overall I think that there still needs to be regulations on guns, we can’t just let people who are dangerous roam around and or have guns.
Before I watched these videos on gun control, I believed that while semi-automatic firearms should be sold to the general populace, the existing methods of defeating current background checks make a more overarching revision of current security procedures necessary. One example of these methods of circumvention is straw sales, a method in which a certain person with an easily authenticated gun control background purchases several firearms, them utilizes check-free gifting laws or the lack thereof to give the purchased firearms to the less-than-legal operations of several criminals. This remains just one method of background check circumvention, and establishes that even should background check laws be revised, criminal activity will continue to thrive off of illegally and legally purchased firearms.Therefore, I believe that the federal government must control not just the purchasers, but must co-opt distribution networks so that only those secondary stores which present lower risks of criminal activity are utilized.
After the videos, I realize that I failed to address a critical aspect of the 2nd Amendment- its history as only applying to militia members, and the recent Supreme Court dismissal of this precedent. Overall, I find that, while the history of the 2nd Amendment is quite interesting, it is ultimately og little use to me due to shifting American cultural norms in this day and age. This information, and the contrasting information on the outlooks of Ds and Rs, has changed one thing in my opinions- I now believe that while high-level firearms such as full automatics are dangerous, the lack of legal acquisition methods has been to the detriment of several individuals who would not have broken federal law otherwise. If we can control the acquisition streams on high-level firearms, it is possible to predict where background check scams will erupt, and specific countermeasures against those scams may be taken rather than simply allowing all acquisitions of those weapons through illegal activity. While this may seem to be somewhat contradictory and dangerous, the fact remains that with the extraordinary amount of guns within the U.S.(exceeding the number of people), comes the need to take extraordinary measures, and to modify current legislation. I am not against gun possession , and in fact oppose gun restrictions. However, I recognize the necessity of limiting criminal activity with guns whenever possible. You can only use a gun when it is not to the detriment of another individual’s rights. Overall, I believe that while my ideas have narrowed in scope, the ideals which propel them into existence are unchanged. Do Not approve the previous post, it is substandard work.
Before I watched the videos, my views on gun control was that the government has to do something to revise the laws that are placed on guns and the people who want to purchase them. If it is one of the governments jobs to protect the people of its country, I feel that the government should try to put more restrictions on people who want to purchase a gun and that there should be more in depth background checks before someone is allowed to purchase a gun. News stories about shootings in public areas, places of worship, and even schools are sadly becoming more common. If a place like a church and a school slowly start to become any less safe than they already are, is when it is clear that new laws need to be created and put in place. If changing our current gun laws is what is takes to lower the amount of innocent people being killed for no specific reason, then I think that that is what should and what needs to happen.
After watching the videos my views on gun laws changed a little bit. I now know that when it comes to banning guns or the 2nd Amendment completely it would most likely be totally ineffective and people would find a way to work around it. I don’t think the 2nd amendment should be completely taken away and that it should continue being a given right in the United States, so knowing that if it was taken away and that there’s a high chance that it would backfire makes me feel a little better. I knew that there were background checks being done before people buy a gun from a certain place. However, because background checks aren’t done everywhere and sometimes aren’t always reliable, you can’t always guarantee that the person who is buying a gun will make smart and law-abiding decisions with that gun. The idea of looking at more records during a background check, is something that should be looked into more. This could help prevent people who don’t have a criminal record be stopped from buying a gun, thus stopping anything bad from happening to that person or other groups of people. Hopefully in the future changes will be made to the laws we have now, and smarter gun laws will be created in order to protect both people’s rights and lives.
Personally i think there is not enough gun control, in 2018 there were as many mass shootings as there was days in the year. I remember there was a potential shooter threat at University of Michigan, my brother texted all of my family that he loved us incase he died, I was to the point of tears, thoughts going through my head, how would I cope without my oldest brother, he’s only 19 he has so much more left to his life, siting in my moms car I thought about things a child should never think about, my mom called him immediately telling him to hide, his words are branded on my mind “mom I’m scared, I don’t want to die.” there is no way your 2nd amendment right should protect and defend these people that have done these crimes. If taking away someone’s right to bare arms is unconstitutional then what is letting them keep the guns and kill innocent people? It’s immoral, and against the rules of the heart. Would you rather sacrifice one small thing for the greater good or sacrifice the greater good for one small thing? And doesn’t the constitution also state that the congress can carry things out that are necessary to the well being of all people ? The founding fathers put this line in to save people and protect people in rebellions and times of war, not for selfish and possesed reasons. There is need for radical change in America about our guns. Why should people be able to purchase a gun that was created for war? What do you need a gun that is meant to kill multiple people for? The banning of assault weapons and guns that are meant to kill multiple people needs to be put in place. Also there needs to be stricter background checks. We need to save our children, innocent people, and immigrants.
The first video fueled my argument more, like I said, the 2nd amendment was put in place to save, not kill. The founding fathers would not approve of these killings, and neither should we.
The second video made me more knowledgeable about the things in place for gun control. I knew there was some background checks, my uncle went through background checks and training before he ever got a gun, and he didn’t get a M15 assault rifle, he got something to protect his family, and himself, he was working in a dangerous area at the time. He didn’t have the evil motive to kill. He only wanted to protect what he loved. I agree with this video, the 3 week process should be universally implemented, but I still think weapons of mass destruction should be banned and be a serious consequence if someone is found in possession of one.
The third video addresses that there is a gun control problem in America and says that background checks wouldn’t help, am d the funny thing is that both the liberalist and the conservative Agree that the background checks aren’t enough.
Overall my view on gun control didn’t change it just got more informed. There is a need for change in America and it starts with us.
My beliefs on gun laws are liberal. Because the way guns are used they aren’t used for protection anymore they are used for violence. We need stronger laws to protect us from guns. Because people can get them very easy. Am are nation needs to be protected. We had multiple school shootings because of the laws allowing people to be able to gain a gun quickly. We should control guns and make use youth don’t get there hands on them. I believe that guns help stay safe like when we are fighting a war. But they are not necessarily for are everyday lives. For example Texas gun laws are extreme because they allow the common human to shot someone when they’re on their property. In my opinion those laws caused a lot of death that was not needed. Guns caused many deaths at school. An in order to stop that we need to tighten are grip on these laws for guns. They should do a background check on anyone that wishes go buy a gun. The video really changed my views on gun control laws. Before watching the video my views were totally different. I didn’t understand the actual issue of barring a gun. The videos showed me the real issue of guns. Like how people use them wrong. Even the people who are supposed to carry gun use them wrong like the police. There are countless so called mistakes were they kill kids that did nothing. I think a gun is a very powerful. I’m not talking about the bullets I’m speaking about how just the fact when you know it’s on you. You just feel like you are the ruler in a sense. But at the same time guns don’t make you that powerful many people have been in a problem and not use the gun they have on them to save their lives and many others. Just cause you buy a gun doesn’t mean your a hero. Many people believe that guns safes life’s they also ruin them. Before the creation of the gun they fought with spears rocks and their hands. If guns weren’t ever created we would have millions of people still on this earth. Maybe if we didn’t have guns then maybe just maybe we wouldn’t have teenagers killing teenagers. Maybe those kids who killed all those other kids would be able to get help. Therefore the use of guns are an issue we need some control on the laws.
Before watching the videos, my initial views were that I wasn’t satisfied with how the country was handling today’s gun laws as well as the consequences along with them, therefore making me feel unsafe. I have always been aware of the Second Amendment however I think with every privilege comes a responsibility. Our country was based on the idea of freedom, therefore the freedoms we are granted are taken seriously and are important but I do think that once someone’s freedom harms another’s freedom and safety there have to be restrictions. I also have a feeling of unsafety because I know this problem didn’t just emerge 5 years ago, it has been going on for a while, meaning we have had time to figure out possible solutions and I don’t feel content with the progress that has been made so far because it hasn’t improved much. I already had previous knowledge to the background checks in place and their ineffectiveness but I didn’t have initial ideas on how to improve the system. However, I was never really pleased with the thought of knowing anyone could carry a gun if they passed a simple background check because guns are a weapon and I don’t associate weapons with peace. In addition to this, many state their reason for gun ownership is for self defense or safety, but in my opinion a lot of this fear comes from the allowance of everyone having the right to own a gun.
After watching the videos my views stayed relatively the same. I had known that the second amendment was originally created to guarantee a strong military. But this was during a time period when we still relied on malitia’s. Today we have a strong police force, as well as a strong military and other security forces whose career are based on protecting us. I agree with the VOX video that it is impossible to buy back every firearm but I do believe we need a stricter and more thorough system when selling and purchasing guns. I support the idea mentioned in the VOX video of establishing a licensing policy in all states, especially since it has been so effective in the states which are already abiding by it. Especially after watching these videos and hearing these debates and comments made by some I strongly believe that our system is flawed and needs to increase its thoroughness to ensure the security of others. It scares me knowing that the majority of the states depend on background checks, although they’re deemed ineffective as seen by the major tragedies going on throughout our country in these past few years.
Overall I am of the opinion that the freedom which our people have been granted since the time of our Founding Fathers should not be taken away however, I do think that it is in the best interest of the safety of our country that we set restrictions and increase our security. I think people should have their natural freedom unless it harms the freedom and safety of others.
Initially I had no real fact-based opinions of gun control. I know about the mass shootings, and my first thought was: “How can someone just get a gun and commit such violent acts? How can the system that checked that person, not see that he was mentally ill? I had all these questions and none of the answers. I knew it was wrong, and I knew that it should not that easy for someone who might be seen as mentally incompetent, or possesses a criminal record to get an assault rifle so easily. But I also knew that people had a right to bear arms for their own protection. After watching those videos, and knowing the facts, my argument still stands.
I see the 2nd amendment two ways, one I support the use to bear in arms for the sole purpose of protection, but I also think there should be a limit on the kinds of guns you can purchase. In the cases of the mass shooting, that have rocked this country, you see mentally ill people entering a school, or a church, a club, or a store with assault weapons to cause mass destruction on tons of innocent victims. AK 47s and AR-15s should not be so easily attainable, or attainable in any instance. We see so many flaws in the gun purchasing system where the federal background checks aren’t sufficient enough to prevent certain people from handling firearms. This outdated system has led to some of the mass shootings, and it is time for a change. We do see, however a gradual incline length of the system, meaning that the process for obtaining these is more strenuous. The FBI database that checks your credibility will also obtain sources from other local law enforcement agencies to justify your application for a gun.
Dating back to the late 1700s, the time of the American Revolution, you had a general consensus, that guns were about protecting themselves from tyranny. The oppressive nature of the British before and during the Revolution, defined this new belief in Americans. And by 1775, half the population owned guns. But in the south, you see guns used to control slaves. I find it extremely ironic how Americans felt oppressed by the British because of their tyrannical power and their use of guns, but inflicted that same fear amongst slaves. The drafting of the second amendment eventually gave the right for the public to bear arms. I see guns as a necessary protection, much like Americans in colonial times who needed protection from the British. But as these mass shootings have surfaced and exposed the flaws in our federal system of obtaining guns, I think it is absolutely necessary to reform it. I think the checking system should be more strict and I think assault weapons need to be bought back.
My initial beliefs on gun laws are that we need more gun control. It is ok to use them for self-defense, such as if a serial killer had broken into your home or you’re being severely assaulted. I also believe it is ok to use a gun when hunting. However, I do believe that we need more control over guns. It’s easier for a teenager to buy a gun than it is to buy a lottery ticket, and it’s possible for the public to buy military level guns via the dark web or private sales. So, although I do believe it’s ok to own guns to a certain point, I also believe there needs to be more background checks and mental health evaluations.
After watching the videos, my opinion has not changed. The Licensing check is much better than the FBI check, yet we still have so many mass shootings. Our society is still fueled by so much hate for people of other religions, skin color, gender, and sexual orientations. Because of this, bad people may come off as good and still pass the Licensing check, which will simply lead to more deaths. More politicians need to promote even more gun control, but they are scared they’re going to lose their public popularity. I shouldn’t have to go to school and be afraid of getting killed, I shouldn’t have to know the quickest way to escape if I’m going somewhere, and yet I, and many of my peers, are. I believe that we still aren’t doing nearly enough in this gun debate, and hopefully, one day, that might change.
I am for the second amendment. I think we have the right to bear arms. I don’t think we should place the blame of mass shootings at gun owner’s feet. We should put it at the shooter’s feet. Gun control is not an effective way to stop killings and mass shootings. You can’t make laws for criminals to follow. Criminals don’t follow laws. If you ban guns, all you are going to do is upset about half of the country and take away our ability to defend ourselves.
Just because you make something illegal does not mean it’s going to stop. Just because drugs are illegal does not stop people from getting them, making them and distributing them. So making guns illegal won’t stop people from getting them, making them or distributing them. All you are going to do is make criminals who sell illegal guns more powerful. During the prohibition era when we outlawed alcohol, criminals such as Al Capone became very powerful through smuggling illegal substances like alcohol. Instead of stopping law abiding citizens from owning guns, let’s prevent these mass shootings from happening at schools by letting people know that if you shoot at us we are going to shoot back. Part of the reason mass shooters come to schools is they know that they are going to be met with very little to no resistance from guns. When they know that a school is a gun free zone all they see is an easy target. If they know that if they are going to be shot, they are going to stop coming.
If your main goal with banning guns is to stop people from being killed, then don’t ban long rifles. Ban handguns. Handguns were responsible for roughly 8000 deaths in 2004 while other guns were only responsible for about 2000 deaths. In 2016 handguns were responsible for 7,105 deaths while rifles caused only 374 deaths. Part of the reason for this is that a handgun can be concealed while a rifle is pretty easy to spot.
Some of the states with the highest murder rates are often states with very strict gun control. Chicago has one of the worst murder rates in the country. They have had 561 murders in 2018. In a large city in Texas, a state with lax gun control, murders were much fewer. Dallas had only 166 murders during 2018. Illinois is known to have some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country while Texas is known for having lots of guns and fairly lax gun laws. Therefore states with less legislation have less crime.
The second amendment grants the citizens a fundamental right to bear arms. It is one of the fundamental bases of our bill of rights because it grants the citizens the ability to throw off a tyrannical government. Those who say that you don’t need “30 rounds in a magazine clip” for hunting are missing the point of why the second amendment was put into place. Most of the people who lobby against guns often do not know a lot about guns. They are not able to see that the gun doesn’t kill people, people kill people. A gun is a tool and the user gives it purpose. If you want to use a gun to hunt, its purpose is for hunting. The user of a gun is what makes a gun deadly, not the gun itself.
If you try to take away rifles from Americans right now they will not give them up. The only way you are going to be able to take away the guns of these people is from their cold dead hands. It will without a doubt start another civil war. They have a right to that weapon through the constitution. If there is another civil war that is right vs. left, the right will without a doubt win. One of the main reasons the right would win is that the right owns all the fire arms. Historically only 10% of the population is needed to overthrow a tyrannical government. In America, 46% of Americans own firearms. There is a very good video by John Mark that proves my point.
The videos did not change my opinion
Before watching these videos, I believed that we should have strong gun control laws and ban the sale of automatic weapons outside of the military. This would prevent many guns from getting into the hands of unstable people. To put it simply, the guns aren’t the problem, it’s the people. I believe that we should have stronger background checks before people can buy a gun, so no killing machine will get in the hands of a murderer or someone who is mentally ill. In past school shootings or any public shootings in general, the perpetrator has always been a kid or grown adult with a mental illness and unstable personality who got their hands on a very powerful gun. Although some shooters have gotten guns from legal gun owners, like family members, who did not store the gun well, this still does not acknowledge the fact that any person who has gotten their hands on a gun could be mentally unstable. To those who would defend themselves by stating that it is their right to own a gun, however, that does not justify that you have the good sense to use it wisely. When the constitution was written, guns took a long time to load, but today, they can shoot hundreds of rounds per minute. Also, when this amendment was made, it was necessary to own a gun to get food or to protect yourselves from Native Americans or dangerous people. Now we live in a more civilized society, it does not make sense for unstable people to buy killing machines for no reason.
After watching the videos, my views still stand and do not change about gun control. There was an idea that did raise into my head after watching the video. I believe that instead of background checks that obviously are not working, people that want to buy a gun could have to prove the reason why they need a gun, and have the proper supporting documentation. This process is very similar to that of medical marijuana or hypodermic needles. Both have a trail of paperwork that you must complete proving why you need the product. If people could state why they need the gun before buying it, this could reduce the chances of guns getting into the hands of people that shouldn’t have them. For example, if a kid wants to buy a gun, but has been thinking about starting a school shooting, or having suicidal thoughts, this would prevent him from getting the gun and making him provide a decent reason of why he needs it. All in all, my views still stand about stronger background checks on people with mental illnesses, and possibly having a process for proving necessity of ownership of a gun.
My initial views before watching the videos regarding the second Amendment are that people should have the right to own a gun. I think that Americans should have the right to own a gun if it is in the use of protection, hunting or target practice. I think that there should be certain limitations on the model of a gun that you can buy, I don’t think people need to be using AR-15’s. Automatic weapons should be banned from purchase because people have misused them in the past with school shootings causing numerous fatalities. I also think that there should be background checks that address mental illness and past records of aggression or crime. I believe people should be able to use guns in self-defense, this is the main way we should be using them. I think that if we enforce strict laws on gun control, people will want to smuggle and buy guns off the black market. Certain restrictions won’t change the mindset of someone who wants to inflict harm on others or themselves. People should be allowed to carry around guns meant for protection and not guns used in war. We need to improve the background check system to keep people safe from criminals in possession of guns.
After watching all 3 videos about gun ownership, my views have not changed. I had previously known that the second amendment was never written to specify all citizens have the right to own a gun, but it was interesting to see how it has been interpreted in many court cases over the years. I am also aware about the opinion that guns could be totally restricted. This would lead to many issues with private sellers, and black market weapons dealers. Some may think that banning guns will reduce the harm and suicude rate as well, but they would be mistaken because most would find other ways to do it. I agree with Vox’s video where they talk and discuss the nation licensing, rather than completely banning guns. This gives people the opportunity to buy guns legally through safe background checks.
My opinions have really not changed at all. I agreed with many ideas from both videos, and I think the solution is to make people have a license in order to purchase a gun. People shouldn’t be allowed to carry guns around on the streets. I believe have the right to own a gun but the laws in purchasing one need to be better controlled.
Before watching the videos I honestly had very little knowledge on gun control and gun policies. I’m aware of a ton of mass shootings that have taken place over the years. I currently attend a high school so I’m very aware of school shootings and although I don’t live in fear that my school could be shut up by an unfit gun owner because my community is very safe many people do live in fear or have experienced the sadness brought by school shooting or sadly been a part of one and not made it themselves because of all the negatives guns bring I am against guns after watching the video of my other gun control remains the same I see you have the right to bear arms in the past might’ve seen necessary owning land was a way to show how were they were so having a gun was a way to protect your land and show dominance if not used to protect one’s land and slaves guns were used in the military in the modern age people are not buying guns to protect the land people are buying guns with the initial idea to shoot other othe I don’t live in fear that my school could be shut up by an unfit gun owner because my community is very safe many people do you live in fear or have experienced the sadness brought by school shooting or sadly been a part of one and not made it themselves because of all the negatives guns bring I am against plans after watching the videos my Allegan can’t control remains the same I see you have the right to bear arms in the past might’ve seen necessary owning land was a way to show how were the you were so having a gun was a way to protect your land and show dominance if not used to protect one’s land and slaves guns were used in the military in the modern age people are not buying guns protector lid people are buying done with the initial idea to shoot others can you says come too far and are mostly be mused for the worst ideas are different nowadays in the olden days people felt safer only again but now I think it brings away the fear my opinion remains the same the second commandment needs more major limitations or needs to be completely abolished
Before watching the videos on gun control, I was relatively anti-gun control. I believe that
government regulation in general should be limited and used only when completely necessary,
such as in the Clean Air Act, or the establishment of the EPA. In my opinion, gun control is an
example of an unnecessary type of regulation, as well as it being an ineffective one. The “war on
drugs” for example, has proven to be very ineffective at stopping illegal drugs from being
distributed on the streets. Why would similar restrictions/bans on guns stop criminals from
obtaining weapons through illegal means? Gun regulation and tightened controls would only
make it more difficult for law abiding citizens to obtain weapons to protect themselves, while it
would be relatively easy for criminals to obtain weapons.
After watching the two videos, my opinions have stayed more or less the same. In the Vox video,
the argument that there should be mandatory fingerprint collection, and the idea that references
should be required to fill out an application for a gun is downright scary. The invasion of privacy
that comes with having to give your fingerprints is reason enough for me to stay away from that
idea, and needing references for an application seems very intrusive; a right should not require
references. The PragerU video made a good argument against government mandated ‘buybacks’,
but did not really give any ideas other than that, which made it seem like a half complete
video, with an incomplete argument. The history of the second amendment video was interesting,
as it showed the origins of the amendment coming from the need for state militias to defend
against foreign attacks or insurrections at home. Even with that video though, I still believe there
are better ways to ensure gun safety than the methods suggested in the Vox video. The videos did
make me reconsider some things though. For example, although I believe that the solution
provided in the Vox video was excessive for simple handguns, for fully automatic rifles it does
seem reasonable. The history of the second amendment video also contributed to my support of
strong background checks for fully automatic rifles as well as licensing requirements for those
weapons, as these kinds of stronger weapons would be more typical of a militia. Overall, even
though the videos themselves didn’t prompt much change in my opinion, they did force me to
reconsider my views and see if they still made sense to me.
Charlie H.
My initial views on gun control are that due to the recent mass shootings large assault rifles and guns used to do these acts should be banned, and only handguns and hunting guns should be accessible to the public. I do not believe in the idea of a background check because many people with bad reputations like former felons who might possible need a handgun to protect himself. But it should take a reasonably long time to insure that people won’t impulsive buy a gun to hurt themselves or hurt others. And the only thing that should be checked is your mental health to make sure a stable human has access to dangerous weapons.
After watching the three videos on gun control my beliefs on gun control my views regarding gun control have changed slightly. I believe that there is no way to ban guns entirely due to the black market and the easy access to illegal guns through such. Also Regarding the mass shooters that got their guns legally should have to wait an extensive amount of time to be able to obtain a gun. Impulse buying guns is a big problem that we can fix, extensive background checks are mandatory in order to insure that we can do anything we can to lower gun control without inflicting with american tradition and rights.I believe in the extensive background check on the liberal side of the gun control video but i am not in favor of the laws against banning assault rifles because doing so would be a process that’s most likely to fail and end in the gun market moving into the black market and also public outrage over american constitutional rights. There is no way to ban guns completely but we can prevent guns being bought impulsively and being given to people who are unfit to have a gun.
My initial views on gun control and my current views on gun control still don’t allow some people who need guns to be able to legally purchase a gun. And the extensive background check should not automatically restrict felons from getting firearms, and should be changed to only let certain offenders of the law access to guns and other things of that nature. The practice should be solely focus on mental health patients that are not mentally fit to have a firearm.also criminals charged with murder without a reasable cause shouldntbeable to own a gun indefinitaly.
In the time after the 7 year war the britsh had lost a lot of money, and needed funding from the colonies. So great britain released harsh taxation laws and a series of acts that economically destroyed the people of the colonies. Great britain taxed the colonies alcohol there paper and there tea leading up the the Boston Tea Party of 1773.the people of the colonies saw america as a way to be free and practice how you feel is right but the same government that the colonist strived to get away from were keeping them not free financially and soon were not able to live the way they wanted because of the harsh laws and acts imposed by the british.
Great britan prior to the amerian revolution used the americas as cash grab, by using there rescoes taking advantage of the slave trade and imposing unfair taxation laws on the colonies. But another reason the people of the colonies did not like the britsh is that they were able to use their own forms of currency which back then was paper money. Now so that the british could make more money off the colonies the used gold and silver forms of currency that are used in other countries such as france and spain. The colonies were taxed for drinks they loved to drink the most popular were alcoholic drinks like bourbon and beer. Tea witch the tea act of 1773 taxed the colonies for tea as well
The cause of the american revolution is economic and many of the arguments derive from economic issues. The 2 other arguments are political and social. The reason both of these arguments are invalid is because the colonist wanted to have representation so that they can be fairly taxed and fairly treated. Also the social argument revolves around a small population of people and it doesn’t affect veryboy only workers who were mad at the farming crisis would care and want change at the time the economic crisis is the only thing lange spread enough to cause something as big as the american revolution. Hence the ameican revolution was started to begin financial freedom for themselves.
Before doing this blog, I was undecided regarding gun control legislation. It was not a topic I spent time thinking about until recently. I believed that guns themselves were not the real problem, but rather a lack of the government passing common sense laws, such as requiring background checks. I also did not agree with the Second Amendment being removed from the Constitution as a whole. The Second Amendment was passed to ensure that the States had strong militias as there was no standing army at the time. In modern times, there is no need for militias and the Supreme Court expanded the right to own guns to all citizens.
I don’t think that guns are the actual problem. I think that we need to pass legislation that would ensure background checks and a waiting period before you can actually get your gun, regardless of where you buy it, sports store, gun show, etc. the main reason that this is still an issue is because of the political parties not agreeing and as a result not passing only gun laws.
Conservatives have continually used the argument that the Second Amendment is scared and should retain the same interpretation as when it was first adopted centuries ago. However this is not a logical argument as modern technology including guns has vastly became more deadly. In the seventeenth century, the militias did not have the advanced weaponry that we have in 2019. The muskets they had back then, were not the most accurate gun because they lacked rifling grooves in the barrel that spins the bullet and contributes to the accuracy of the musket. There were no semiautomatic weapons or AR-15s that could kill dozens of people in a few minutes. The fact that the conservatives think that it is unconstitutional to alter the Second Amendment by restricting gun sales is deeply concerning in terms of domestic safety.
The second reason the conservatives are wrong when it comes to gun control is that they blame violent video games as the cause of school shooters. This is untrue because a lot of other countries have video games that are more violent than American ones, and you never hear stories of school shooters in those countries such as Japan. Another example is Europe. The only news you hear about violent attacks is not with guns but rather knife attacks. European nations have forms of gun laws in place to reduce the number of deaths caused by firearms. Overall, in my opinion, I think America has to pass more restrictions on the right to buy and own guns, but the Second Amendment should not be abolished.