The warning on a milk container at my local grocery store prohibits misuse or theft by law. After researching the definition of "prohibited" in Reader's Digest's Great Encyclopedic Dictionary, I found two definitions. The first is to forbid, especially by authority or law, and the second is to prevent or hinder. It is unclear which definition applies in this warning. While it may be possible to forbid misuse or theft through a law, it may not completely prevent it. Law-abiding citizens would likely not misuse or take the container, but those with malicious intent might be deterred if they knew there would be consequences for their actions.
Now let's shift our focus to the connection between the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and gun control. J. Neil Schulman, an award-winning author and president of SoftServ Publishing, sought understanding
...from Roy Copperud about what exactly this amendment means. Copperude, an experienced newspaper writer and former professor of journalism at USC for 17 years, was asked several questions about the Second Amendment by Schulman.In his written response,Copperude stated that based on the entire sentence of the amendment,the right to bear arms remains unrestricted.
The amendment itself, as Copperude (Larson 153) points out, appears in one sentence and highlights the importance of both a well-regulated Militia for state security and the unrestricted right of individuals to keep and bear Arms. Schulman's summary agrees with this interpretation, stating that the Constitution guarantees citizens' right to bear arms without any government-imposed restrictions, aligning with the intentions of the founding fathers. However, Levinson notes that debates often arise when determining an amendment's purpose because strict literal interpretation
may not be sufficient. Schulman explains that alternative interpretations can lead to issues despite allowing for different meanings. One concern is whether widespread gun possession would increase violence, drawing on experiences from the wild west. While there are strong supporters of the amendment, some suggest infringing on these rights as completely eliminating guns is not feasible. As a result, gun control emerges as a potential solution. One proposed approach is making it illegal for criminals to possess or carry guns; however, flaws in this strategy have been previously addressed. Nevertheless, if our hypothetical scenario were to impose strict penalties, it might prove effective.Clayton Cramer's article about Haynes v. U.S.(1968) presents a fascinating and puzzling example that highlights the drawbacks of such an approach. Miles Edward Haynes, a convicted felon, appealed his conviction for possessing an unregistered short-barreled shotgun on the grounds that it would violate his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. He argued that registering the gun would be an admission of breaking the law and incriminating himself, while failing to register it would result in punishment for possessing an unregistered firearm. Surprisingly, Haynes was successful with this argument, leading to revisions in gun control and registration laws out of concerns regarding their effectiveness in protecting law-abiding citizens and reducing the threat posed by violent criminals (Cramer 3). As a result of skilled lawyers and early release from prison after six weeks, even individuals with multiple convictions for serious crimes can legally register a short-barreled shotgun. Despite ongoing efforts to design effective methods of gun control, they fail to address the fundamental point that firearms offer protection for vulnerable individuals who have the right to
defend their freedoms using guns.Guns are used to protect against oppressive governments, potential assailants, and criminals who aim to violate rights or property. They could have potentially saved lives during historical moments of persecution, like the experiences of groups such as Jews and Blacks under leaders like Adolf Hitler. Similarly, in events like the Tiananmen Square protests in China, more advanced weapons could have helped college students defend themselves against brutal suppression. Critics argue that guns can facilitate evil acts more easily than good ones but should not be dismissed solely based on this potential negative impact. However, it is important to note that England's lower number of firearms supports gun control measures and leads to a decrease in gun-related crimes like killings and robberies. Additionally, England also has lower rates of stabbings with knives and beatings with hands and feet, suggesting other factors may influence these statistics (Kates 4). There is a correlation between an increase in gun sales during the 1960s and a surge in crime rates (Kates 3). As a Christian, citizen, and fellow human being who values truth deeply held opinion I would like to share my perspective in response to these arguments.The Supreme Court banned prayer in public schools in the early sixties, leading to potential lawsuits over displaying the Ten Commandments. Nowadays, calling out sin is often seen as intolerance, resulting in denial of God's existence and absolute truths. The importance of the Bible's commandments like "Thou shalt not kill" and "Be ye kind" is disregarded in modern times. This dismissal encourages those who believe in survival of the fittest to disregard human life, contributing to increasing crime rates
such as murder, rape, robbery, and suicide. This perspective argues that life lacks purpose and meaning. Rather than focusing solely on gun control and influencing beliefs, it is suggested that responsible individuals be allowed to own guns while preventing access for those who pose harm. The Works Cited section includes citations for articles and books related to self-incrimination, gun registration, firearms, and violent crime.
- Federal government essays
- Armed Forces essays
- Confederate States Of America essays
- Federal Government Of The United States essays
- Fourteenth Amendment To The United States Constitution essays
- Governance essays
- Parliament essays
- Politics essays
- Jurisdiction essays
- Bureaucracy essays
- Separation Of Powers essays
- Congress essays
- President essays
- United States Congress essays
- Non-Commissioned Officer essays
- Appeal essays
- Revenge essays
- Corporate Governance essays
- Public Service essays
- Income Tax essays
- Supply essays
- Red Cross essays
- Democracy essays
- State essays
- Liberty essays
- Absolutism essays
- Reform essays
- Republic essays
- John Marshall essays
- Bourgeoisie essays
- Developed Country essays
- Elections essays
- International Relations essays
- Left-Wing Politics essays
- Monarchy essays
- Political Corruption essays
- Political Party essays
- Political Science essays
- Sovereign State essays
- United Nations essays
- World Trade Organization essays
- Contras essays
- Dictatorship essays
- Foreign policy essays
- Monarch essays
- Corruption essays
- Foreign essays
- Democratic Party essays
- European Union essays
- President Of The United States essays