Many arguments for and against gun control in our country revolve around the second amendment. Unfortunately the majority of those arguments are based on an individual’s perception of what the second amendment means. The second amendment was adopted into the United States Bill of Rights in 1791, which was 222 years ago. The second amendment states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” (National Archives and Records Administration).
In that span of 222 years there have been many court cases and adjustments to the second amendment, some of those changes have remained and some have been overturned. Recently President Barack Obama proposed changes regarding gun control, which according to U. S. News included: Obama encouraged Congress to pass legislation which, among other things, would increase background check protocols; ban assault weapons, high-capacity ammunition, and armor-piercing bullets; and provide more funding for additional police officers on the street, first responder training, mental health programs, and school emergency plans.The president also announced executive measures to make data relevant to background checks more available; to nominate a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives director; to increase Centers for Disease Control and Prevention research into gun violence; and to encourage the hiring of "school resource officers" at schools, among other initiatives. Among President Obama’s proposals there is not anything stating that he wishes to prevent Americans from their right to “bear arms” which is the only topic of the second amendment.
Nowhere in the second amendment does it state that we should have the right to own assault weapons or high-capacity ammunition. The proposals that were presented were based on protecting the adults and children in our country, to place responsibility and accountability on gun owners and the people selling guns, and to attempt to put in place certain regulations that would help prevent even more senseless crimes.In the United States according to Federal law, if you are a convicted felon you are not permitted to own a gun, meaning that even though the second amendment states that your right cannot be taken away, we as a country have determined that it should be. If you are using the second amendment to base your argument against gun control, you are defending the right for convicted felons (no matter the crime) to possess guns as well. Much like the seatbelt laws that have been passed, the proposal for gun laws is to protect our safety.
Requiring seatbelts has dramatically decreased the fatality rate in car accidents. According to the CDC, “Seat belt use is on the rise. Laws, education, and technology have increased seat belt use from 11% in 1981 to nearly 85% in 2010, saving hundreds of thousands of lives” (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control). If stricter gun laws were to be passed and more education required before owning a gun, the gun related fatalities in the United States would most likely decrease as well.Max Fischer of the Washington Post wrote: The national rate of firearm-related murders, which is charted above. The United States has by far the highest per capita rate of all developed countries.
According to data compiled by the United Nations, the United States has four times as many gun-related homicides per capita as do Turkey and Switzerland, which are tied for third. The U. S. gun murder rate is about 20 times the average for all other countries on this chart.That means that Americans are 20 times as likely to be killed by a gun than is someone from another developed country. Stricter laws created for the people and not against them are what has been proposed.
Guns are extremely dangerous weapons, just like cars have the potential to be. Would you want an inexperienced, erratic, unsafe driver behind the wheel of a car on the road next to you? Would you give a license to someone that never had to read a driver’s manual or take a driving test? Then you shouldn’t be willing to hand an inexperienced, improperly educated, irresponsible person a gun either.
