One of liberals most important arguments is for gun-control. Many even advocate the banning of guns altogether. Here is the case for gun ownership.
It's a fundamental RIGHT as an American
The constituiton specifically states the following: "the right of people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed". Our constituiton clearly states that as an American citizen you have the right to keep and bear arms. I don't know what drives the left thinking they can take that right away, but if in fact it is for "practical purposes" we will get there later. The supreme court has even ruled against gun bans. Back to TV bias studies show stories promoting gun control surpass those that don't by a 10-1 margin. Americans also happen to share the same view. In a poll it was found that 85% believe people should be able to use a gun to defend themselves in their homes. Still some on the left do not see it as a right.
Gun Control Doesn't Actually Reduce Crime
Since 1991, the number of guns in the U.S has increased by the millions. However, robbery, murder, and violent crime has decreased. Guns are there to protect people, and in fact they do. 99.6% of handguns are not used to commit crimes. It is a fact that everywhere that guns have been banned in some way, crime has gone up. That is because people are left with nothing to protect themselves with. What idealist liberals don't understand is that criminals aren't going to actually follow the laws and give up their guns. Law abiding citozens will. So the whole thing is backwards. Criminals will have them but nobody else will. Major studies showed that if all states excepted right t0 carry policies, nearly 60,000 assaults could have been saved.
Obama's View of Guns
Obama like many issues happened to flip-flop on gun control. In 1996 he filled out a questionaire stating he favored the ban, sale, and possesion of hanguns. He also supported the DC handgun ban. Now, that he is running for president and calculated the number of people with guns, he says he supports the right to bear arms. A bit confusing? Obama also thinks people cling to their guns.
Examples of Gun Control
To further back up my case of why gun control is not practical, let me share some examples. In DC when guns were banned in 1987, the murder rate tripled. Countries like England who have strict gun control have a much higher violence ratings than countries that don't. In Chicago when handguns were banned, murders using handguns increased. The main point here is that gun control does the opposite of its intention.
Solutions
The real solution here is not take guns away from everybody. What needs to be done is stricter enforcement and laws against those who commit gun crimes. A law in Virginia that the NRA supports, would make mandatory sentances for criminals who illegaly purchased firearms and allowed for people to keep guns at their homes. The democrats opposed this! Following this they have seen a decrease in violence!
Gun Safety
The fact is that the number of kids killed by guns is not that high compared to those killed by cars or drowning. We do need background checks to make sure criminals or mentally ill do not obtain weapons, and if they do they need severe punishment. Firearms also are responsible for only about 1% of deadly incidents against kids. A study shows that guns are used to protect people over 2 million times a year. The media however focuses on the times they are misused therefore distorting the facts.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Hoorah! Finally, a topic on which we totally agree.
I don't want a ban on guns, just less rediculous gun laws
like why is it that in Nevada you need to wait 3 days before purchasing a handgun for backround checks, but you can walk in and buy an automatic weapon on the spot.
just a thought. Maybe it should be flipflopped to make more sence??
I agree that reasonable restrictions should apply.
On a related note, the Supreme Court issued a first-of-its-kind ruling on the second amendment. In the case of the District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court held " ... that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for private use. It was the first Supreme Court case in United States history to directly address whether the right to keep and bear arms is a right of individuals or a collective right that applies only to state-regulated militias." (wikipedia.org)
At the same time, they ruled,
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose." The Court's opinion, although refraining from an exhaustive analysis of the full scope of the right, "should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
Agreed about the second amendment, as long as automatic weapons are banned.
Thats a slippery slope. If you ban them then that will lead to banning more and more. I don't see a need for automatic weapons but they need to be legal for the sake of other weapons. Also, the ones using automatic weapons for harm are probably the ones that will continue to possess them.
Post a Comment