In America there are many laws, and many of these laws have a lot to do with how we live our lives. These laws affect everything from where and how we drive to how long we attend school. The law also dictates when you become an adult, but this line is already very blurry. You can smoke and vote at 18 and are considered an adult however you are not able to drink legally in most states. In addition to that in most states if you commit a particularly heinous crime under 18 you can still be charged as an adult. So what they tell me is that I might be an adult at 13, 18 or 21? That makes sense. Similarly, another control the government puts on our lives is gun control. The issue has most recently popped up in the Supreme court case that is currently pending review. The law in question is the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 which states that is is illegal for residents in Washington, D.C. to own a handgun.
This court decision which is due sometime in the end of June is the most important decision on the 2nd amendment ever. This question of whether the right to bear arms belongs to the state or to individuals is, I believe, a moot point. The reason that the Founding Fathers put this into the constitution was so that the people would be able to protect themselves from their own government. This isn't a question about hunting or states having militias, this about the constitutional right of the individual to own guns. It is the principle which is in jeopardy in the court decision. If the government says that we as law-abiding citizens can't own guns, then what can stop them from taking other things, and once they start taking, what is there to stop them? Nobody has any guns. This is what I like to call a problem.
The only Hope that I have is that the court finds that the right to bear arms belongs to the individual. If this happens then, hopefully, we will be able to have guns available to us in this country forever. However if the court finds that the right to bear arms belongs to the state militias then we are in trouble. Not only would there be wide implications for hunting and sport shooting but also self-defense. If someone breaks into your house and they know that as a law-abiding citizen you don't have a gun then what deterrent do they have?
In a suburb of Atlanta the city Kennesaw has an ordinance which requires every head of household to own a gun and proper ammunition. Although there is no penalty for violating the law, many homeowners felt that it would be a good idea and got a gun. When the law was adopted in 1982 the small town was thrust into the spotlight, and since 1982 the city has had a dramatically lower crime rate. This is an excellent example that if a criminal feels that a homeowner might have a gun then they are a lot less likely to break in. It reminds me of a great phrase, "If you outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have guns". My feelings exactly. I hope, for the sake of America's constitution and America's future, that the Supreme court will give the individual the right to protect himself, his family and his country if need be.
This court decision which is due sometime in the end of June is the most important decision on the 2nd amendment ever. This question of whether the right to bear arms belongs to the state or to individuals is, I believe, a moot point. The reason that the Founding Fathers put this into the constitution was so that the people would be able to protect themselves from their own government. This isn't a question about hunting or states having militias, this about the constitutional right of the individual to own guns. It is the principle which is in jeopardy in the court decision. If the government says that we as law-abiding citizens can't own guns, then what can stop them from taking other things, and once they start taking, what is there to stop them? Nobody has any guns. This is what I like to call a problem.
The only Hope that I have is that the court finds that the right to bear arms belongs to the individual. If this happens then, hopefully, we will be able to have guns available to us in this country forever. However if the court finds that the right to bear arms belongs to the state militias then we are in trouble. Not only would there be wide implications for hunting and sport shooting but also self-defense. If someone breaks into your house and they know that as a law-abiding citizen you don't have a gun then what deterrent do they have?
In a suburb of Atlanta the city Kennesaw has an ordinance which requires every head of household to own a gun and proper ammunition. Although there is no penalty for violating the law, many homeowners felt that it would be a good idea and got a gun. When the law was adopted in 1982 the small town was thrust into the spotlight, and since 1982 the city has had a dramatically lower crime rate. This is an excellent example that if a criminal feels that a homeowner might have a gun then they are a lot less likely to break in. It reminds me of a great phrase, "If you outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have guns". My feelings exactly. I hope, for the sake of America's constitution and America's future, that the Supreme court will give the individual the right to protect himself, his family and his country if need be.
3 comments:
excellent points dustin. i think that in addition to that there needs to be a few more restrictions on how easy it is to obtain a gun. I would love to never hear about another drive by taking place. If safety and execution classes were mandatory then i think you might see a lot less illegally obtained guns floating around. You dont just go out and buy a car without knowing how to use it, you could kill someone. Well, i think the same applies to guns.
Jessi
The biggest problem our government faces with respect to issues like this is the fact that its people want both freedom and protection. Complete freedom means there is no protection beyond what you can provide for yourself, and complete saftey means there is no freedom. We, as a nation, are going to be continually fluctuate between favoring one or the other as a perfect balance is likely not feasible.
Jordan
Good words.
Post a Comment