Gun Control Is Bad; 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms Should Not Be Infringed
Introduction
The past decade has been graced with a lot of arguments, article reviews as well as academic researches on the impact of gun control. Numerous publications have been made about the 2nd amendment that has been made over the past five years and have aroused debate on whether gun control is bad or it will be interfering with this amendment. The right to own firearms is a fundamental right for everyone in the United States. This is in regards to the 2nd amendment in the US constitution. Research has proven that law-abiding citizens use guns for self-defense. This has, however, been refuted by the fact that it has increased the rate of violence in the states. This has thereby brought about numerous proposals to tighten gun control measures to reduce the rate of violence. Gun control is not bad and is only aimed at providing a better society with reduced crime rates, and therefore the 2nd amendment right to bear arms should be infringed.
Gun control will be an act of enhancing a sense of safety to the people. The work of law enforcement agencies is to protect civilians and citizens of the United States. True to this, they are doing a wonderful job but cannot protect everyone all the time. This, therefore, makes firearms an essential asset to gun owners (Lund, Nelson, Adam, 2015). It adds a sense of safety to their lives, even with the law enforcers around. In a research conducted in between the ear 1982-1983 in prisons that had convicted people for felony revealed that a large number of them believed that an armed citizen is far more dangerous than police owning one. Others believed that even if a citizen had a gun, they would still go-ahead to commit their crime without being bothered that the citizen has a gun. The people, therefore, think that a gun prevents them from being victimized and thus would feel safe with the arms (Blocher, Joseph, 2014). But how far has the law gone with controlling the use of these firearms?
Even though there is a bill of rights passed allowing people to own firearms and use them at their peril, it would be better if there were more strict regulations controlling their use (Fleming, James, Linda, 2014). For example, there should be strict vetting of anyone who wants to own a gun, for instance, vet their psychological and mental state.
A person in an unstable psychological state, would not hesitate to pull out their gun on anyone at even the slightest provocation. Also, there should be some strict sentencing for anyone who uses their gun for other reasons other than self-defense. The self-defense reason should be duly investigated and evidence produced to prove that the person truly used their gun for self-defense. Failure to this, both the victim and the victimizer should have their share of punishment. Also, their gun licenses should be taken away from them, never to be reissued.
Conclusion
Gun control is essential and would not be aimed at infringing the bill of rights as passed in the 2nd amendment of the United States constitution. To reduce the high level of violence as a result of gun use, such measures should be incorporated.
Work cited
Blocher, Joseph. “Gun Rights Talk.” BUL Rev. 94 (2014): 813.
Fleming, James E., and Linda C. McClain. “Ordered Gun Liberty: Rights with Responsibilities and Regulation.” BUL Rev. 94 (2014): 849.
Lund, Nelson, and Adam Winkler. “The Second Amendment.” National Constitution Center, Interactive Constitution (2015): 15-23.