ORIGINAL: bigtim6656


Argumentative
April, 28, 2009
Second Amendment of the United States Constitution
“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.” Those words live in the heart of every American whether you believe in them or not.

Our constitution gives [change to "protects"] certain unalienable [change to "inalienable"] rights. The 2nd Amendment to the 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.” This right states a person or militia has the right to keep and bear arms be it a single shot, hunting, rifle, or a semi-automatic AR15 defense rifle. This right was given to the people by our founding fathers not out of fear, greed or a want to control the people. [Change to "Recent administrations have sought to limit the right out of fear, greed or a want to control the people." and then move to end of pargraph.] This right was given to the people ["protected from infringement by the government"]as a tool to aid and keep a safe and just government. Our founding fathers knew that without the people’s right to bear arms there would be no Free State.

Over the years there have been many debates over the 2nd amendment. Some feel it is the right of a well regulated militia not the right of normal citizens. Most recently the U.S Supreme Court ruled on this issue. In the case of District of Columbia V. Heller
It stated that

“THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI IS GRANTED LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: WHETHER THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS - D.C CODE §§ 7-2502.02(a)(4), 22-4504(a), AND 7-2507.02 - VIOLATE THE SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY STATE-REGULATED MILITIA, BUT WHO WISH TO KEEP HANDGUNS AND OTHER FIREARMS FOR PRIVATE USE IN THEIR HOMES? CERT. GRANTED 11/20/2007

QUESTIONS PRESENTED:

Whether the Second Amendment forbids the District of Columbia from banning
private possession of handguns while allowing possession of rifles and shotguns.
LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: 04-7041”

This opinion by the court stated that the people’s right to keep and bear arms was not a right[reserved] to militias and militaries but a right for every American citizen. This opinion was one need for many years as it was one of the few if not the only one to state the people’s right to keep and bear arms was a right to every person not just to militias.

On May 1, 1982 the city of Kennesaw Ga. passed a city ordinance stating every head of house hold ["household" is one word.] was now required to own [add "at least"] one firearm with ammunition. This law was passed with an amendment that allow those with a moral objection or those lawfully banned from owning a gun to not own a gun. [I would say "that exempted those with a moral objection or those lawfully banned from the requirement to own a gun.] It also did not have a penalty for not following the law. Gary Kleck, a criminologist, attributes a drop of 89% in the residential burglary rate to the law. Kennesaw proves that gun bans do not lower crime rate. In fact it is the complete opposite. Gun ownership lowers the crime rate. A lot of people will tell you guns kill too many people and should be banned. My answer to that would be guns do not think or act. [I would simply say "But, guns do not think or act."] There [They are] a machine [replace "machine" with "tool"] being controlled by a person. An answer to that would be to ask them if [replace "if" with "whether"] cars kill too many people and should be outlawed.

On the other hand there are way too many criminals with guns. Every year too many people are shot and killed by people who should not own firearms. At the Virginia Tech Collegemassacre, student Seung-Hui Cho killed 33 people along with his self, [I would say "and himself']and wounded 23 others. It was later found he was a competed ["a competed" doesn't make sense here. What are you trying to say?] to a mental hospital but, due to gaps in the N.C.I.C background check, it was not known when I [you mean when "he" bought, right?] bought his two semi automatic handguns.

On April 3, 2009, a gunman entered the American Civic Association building and started firing at people in the building. Fourteen people were shot and killed including the gunman who took his own life. At first it was said the gunman was using a high powered assault rifle, But [but] later it was found to be [determined that he had used] a handgun.

Even though many deadly and evil things happen when we allow criminals [to] get their hands on guns, our United States Constitution still states “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.”

Throw out all personal opinions on this issue and understand if you take away the 2nd amendement [Amendment] what will keep someone else from taking away the 1st, 3rd, or 4th? So next time you say we should outlaw guns maybe yhour [you] should think about or [our] right to free speech or or [our]right to protest.