AGAINST GUN CONTROL

Against Gun Control

Against Gun Control

Guns owned by the average law abiding citizen aren't used in crimes, but they might be one day. Not just any crimes, of course. No, they won't be used to rob liquor stores, settle disputes between rival drug-trafficking gangs, or commit other crimes that happen in the real world. If gun control activists get their way, the crime will be simply owning them. Gun control will accomplish one or the other of two outcomes. Gun control will either make criminals of otherwise law-abiding citizens, or it will allow only the criminals to own guns, greatly compromising the safety of the average citizen. Thankfully our forefathers set forth a group of laws upon the advent of the United States entitled “The Constitution of the United States. Several amendments were added. One of these laws is the Second Amendment which reads as follows: “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.

It is difficult for the mean citizen to understand the amendment; although, in October 2001, the joined States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit directed in the United States verses Emerson case that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and accept arms. Fifth Circuit older referee, WilliamL. Garwood, wrote the documented decision. It is dedicated to matters of the Second Amendment and finds it entirely in favor of the individual privileges interpretation. To quote a piece of this article, the court said: "We have found no chronicled clues that the Second Amendment was proposed to convey militia power to the states or concerns only to constituents of a select militia. All of the clues shows that the Second Amendment, like other components of the account of Rights, concerns to and defends one-by-one Americans. We find that the annals of the Second Amendment reinforces the simple significance of its text, namely that it protects one-by-one Americans in their right to keep and bear arms if or not they are a constituent of a select militia or accomplishing active infantry service or training. We decline the collective privileges and sophisticated collective privileges models for understanding the Second Amendment. We hold, consistent with United States verses Miller, that it protects the right of individuals, including those not then actually a member of any militia or engaged in active military service or training, to privately possess and bear their own firearms . . ..” In this quote two court cases ruled that the Second Amendment refers to individual United States Citizens rights, the right to keep and bear arms. The three-judge panel all completely agreed that the right to arms may be subject to only "limited, specific exceptions or restrictions that are reasonable and not inconsistent with the right of Americans generally to individually keep and bear their private arms as historically understood in this country.” As examples of these reasonable exceptions, the court noted that "felons, ...