The second amendment states “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Our Founding Fathers believed that governments are prone to use soldiers to oppress the people. History had suggested that this risk could be controlled by permitting the government to raise armies (consisting of full-time paid troops) only when needed to fight foreign enemies. “We established however some, although not all its (self-government) important principles. The constitutions of most of our states assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think ...view middle of the document...
In vehicles without a trunk, the unloaded firearm shall be in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console (Federal Gun Laws). There are many other laws regarding ammunition, dealers of firearms, antique firearms, sales between individuals which state, that a person without a federal firearm license may not sell a firearm to another individual (Federal Gun Laws).
The right to keep and bear arms is a lot like the right to freedom of speech. In each case, the Constitution expressly protects a liberty that needs to be insulated from the ordinary political process. Neither right, however, is absolute. The First Amendment, for example, has never protected perjury, fraud, or countless other crimes that are committed through the use of speech. Similarly, no reasonable person could believe that violent criminals should have unrestricted access to guns. Violence in America is a roller coaster ride of change. There are times of high numbered issues and also times where the numbers are incredibly low. In 2005, 11,346 persons were killed by firearm violence and 477,040 persons were victims of a crime committed with a firearm (National Institute of Justice). Nationwide in 2008, law enforcement agencies reported that 55% of aggravated assaults, 27% of robberies, 40% of rapes, and 64% of murders that were reported to police resulted in an alleged offender being arrested and turned over for prosecution (Bureau of Justice Statistics).
Statistics have shown that people who are attacked by a criminal are safer if they use a weapon to resist their attacker than if they do not resist. Additionally, those who resist with a gun are less likely to be injured than those who use a less effective weapon, such as a knife
(Quigley 14). Although you have a gun when resisting, that does not conclude that you will need to fire the weapon. Statistics show that in true life instances of self-defense with firearms, firing the gun was necessary only one third to one half of the time (13), the rest of the time the mere
presence of a gun was enough to scare away the attacker.
Although I agree with the constitutional right to bear arms, I do believe that there should be a psychological evaluation and more restrictive licensing process to be able to purchase a fire arm. The process becoming more difficult may not abolish the crime rate in America, but it could help to save more lives. We as a country should look at every situation as if it directly affects us. We often make our decisions based on rights and laws, but not often do we weigh the pros and cons of how it may directly affect us....