Should Americans have the right to bear arms?

Question

I'm writing a research/debate paper on "an issue of my choice" and I really didn't want to do political candidates, or something like global warming.
So I thought this might be a different, and very debatable subject.

Now I just need some opinions.
Please don't be vague, yes or no answers aren't what I'm looking for. Explain why you think we should or should not have the right to bear arms.

Answer 1

If you're doing research on the subject for a paper, I'll suggest a few books to you: (1) Thank GOd I Had a Gun by Chris Bird. Lists case stories of several people who might not be alive today if they had not been armed. (2) Armed and Female by Paxton Quigley. She argues, very cogently, that there is nothing but a gun which can equalize a small, weak woman to a large, strong man who is intent on doing harm to her. (3) That Every Man Be Armed: The Evolution of a Constitutional Right by Stephen Halbrook. (4) Death by GUn Control by Aaron Zelman and Richard Stevens. (5) Dial 911 and Die by Richard Stevens, which points out that police have no legal duty to respond to calls for help from citizens. (6)Guns and Violence, the English Experience by Joyce Lee Malcolm which points out how as England has basically banned handgun ownership and made self-defense illegal,violent crime in that country has skyrocketed. (7) MOre GUns Less Crime by John Lott, a very detailed statistical study that proves the premise the title indicates: namely, that the more guns we have, the less crime we have.



My own view is that we absolutely have the right to bear arms, As Second Amendment Sisters says, "Self Defense is a basic human right." Actually at the time of the founding of the US constitution, the right to self-defense with firearms was considered to be so basic, so unquestionably right, that no effort was made to include it in the constitution because it was so "obvious" a right.

Studies have shown that every major genocide in the 20th century was preceded by the government disarming the people, so that they could not defend themselves. Hitler disarmed the Jews. Millions have perished in part because their guns were taken away from them.

Answer 2

Yes, Americans do and should have the right to bear arms. (1) The 2nd amendment refers to a militia. People don't understand what a militia is. It isn't something like the National Guard or the Army, a government agency, that you sign up for and then you're officially in. No, a militia is a people's army, organized not by the government by the people, and it is a group of armed people who may actually be called to defend themselves and their country FROM their government. Thus, a militia may be a spontaneously formed group, made out of whichever citizens have arms (and this is why we are ALL supposed to have arms), which could be quickly organized and ready to act with those arms to defend the people of the nation from a tyrannical or abusive government. This is exactly what happened in Britain, and the framers of the constitution had experience with an abusive government, so they wanted to make sure the American people could be armed in the case that they had to fight against their own government.

(2) The US constitution does not even address the issue of self-defense, which as another person pointed out, was an assumed "right" that pre-existed the US Constitution. Self-defense is a very ancient right. The requirement for self-defense is that we be at least as well armed as our attacker. If criminals have guns, then law abiding citizens must also be able to have guns.

The sad case of the extreme increase in violent crime in England is an example of what happens when we prohibit citizens from being armed, and only the criminals have the guns.

Answer 3

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.



Part of the reason we fought the American Revolution is because we were being taxed by Britain for the defense of our western borders. When the country was founded, one of the concerns was the cost of raising a standing army. Rather than do that, a militia system was established. Contrary to popular belief, you could not own just any weapon. Statues defined what weapon you had to own and what military accountrements were required; all of which you had to purchase out of your own pocket. Even in peace time, basically all men between the ages of 18 and 65 had to show up for their town's militia training (basically loosing 2 days of work). Failing to show up with the right equipment or failing to show up, would result in fines and punishments. In the 1830s the entire standing army of the USA was 5,000 men, with the rest of the country being enrolled in militias.



Especially along the eastern seaboard there was very little use for a weapon other than militia service. Having been spent 200 years heating and cooking with wood, the eastern seaboard was approximately 70% deforested. Most of the trees you see on the eastern seaboard are less than 70 years old.



If you are a strict constructionalist of the Constitution, you would interpret this amendment to mean that owning a weapon was defined for the purpose of being in a militia. The culture of the gun seems to have been a post-civil war development.

Answer 4

Without any question - YES!!!!!!!. It is our 2nd Amendment right to bear arms..



With all these people wanting to ban Americans from bearing arms for their own protection are idiots... All the gun laws they can make up or think up will never work... First, Any criminal that gets a gun is definately not getting the gun legally and he doesnt care about any law to begin with. So, on the second issue is that this will only prevent legal citizens to obtain a gun to protect their family and property.. What are they going to do to the criminal when he goes into someones home?? Sorry criminal but that is against the law!!! Right!!!

Third, if more people who can legally obtain a weapons permit and take classes about the law and the rights to protect themselves and thier family should and DO have the right too.. Also, should there be more people who are carrying concealed weapons legally with a CCW permit I would think that the criminals will start to be a little more hesistant to do some crime when they have no idea who might be shooting back at them...



I am a CCW permit holder and I do carry at all times and should I see a criminal doing something like what happened to the girls at the 2 colleges recently killed or the college in Illinois - Trust me I would not hestitate to respond and deal with the situation at hand to prevent innocent lives being taken for no reason....



Another thing is to make criminals accountable for their actions. Should they murder someone in the commission of a crime and are convicted for it...Walk them right to the chair and take care of it.. This cry of cruel and inhumane punishment with injection is idiotic.. OK, How ever they killed their victim is how they should be killed. Strangled? Hang Em, Stabbed? Cut their throat, If they did it to their victim and it was cruel to them then why not give them the same death???

Answer 5

Americans have the right to bear arms based on 200 years of case law, not the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment gives well regulated militias the right to bear arms in order to defend the country. This is obviously open to debate, as it has been debated for the past 200 years including today in the U.S. Supreme Court. But cases that have been tried in the courts for the past 200 years gives a clear precedent that Americans do have the right to own and carry weapons with certain regulations in place, such as having to pass a criminal check before purchasing.

Answer 6

direct quotes from the framers of the constitution.

THOMAS JEFFERSON "no free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms"

RICHARD HENRY LEE "a militia when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves"

GEORGE MASON "I ask, who are the militia? they consist now of the whole people, except for a few public officers"

JOHN ADAMS "here,every private person is authorized to arm himself"

the second amendment was seen by these people as insurance that the people would never have to submit to a tyrannical government. it never had anything to do with hunting.



at the time the second amendment was added THERE WERE NO(0) STATE MILITIAS every citizen was considered a member of the milita. & well regulated ment kept in good repair, or in the case of militias it ment well armed & supplied.

Answer 7

It's a tough one.

The 2nd amendment is pretty vague. But, my personal opinion is that the the framers would not have used the word PEOPLE if they were talking about state militias... I think they only brought up the state militia because of the controversy over article 1.



In every other use of the word PEOPLE in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution as a whole, we assume that they are referring to indaviduals... SO, I would stick with that.

Answer 8

This is a very recent news topic as the supreme court is to make a ruling regarding the second amendment within the next few days. I suggest checking out C-Span for info on that case. In my opinion, Americans should retain the right to bear arms, so long as they do so legally; as long as they purchase them with proper permits and are subject to background checks, rather than buying them in unregulated markets at state gun shows or from black market dealers. Also, I believe that all guns should be stored with proper gun locks. Keeping guns out of the hands of children and dangerously unstable people is the main issue with gun control, not keeping them away from average citizens.



This segment of an article from Reuters presents some frightening facts about gun use in the US:



"There were 12,682 gun homicides in the United States in 2005, the last year data are available from the Centers for Disease Control. All gun deaths totaled 30,694, including categories such as accidents and suicides, an average of 84 per day."

Answer 9

Yes they should.

because guns are tools just like any other.

Hunting is an American heritage, and should not be obstructed except in cases where people decide to hunt humans.



A simple straw isn't going to kill anyone if used in a responsible way, but if you ram it up someone's nose about 9 inches, and watch them twitch around on the floor, without calling an ambulence, they wil not survive.

Now was it you that killed them, or the straw?

Should the straw be made illegal?



With that in mind, anyone who plans on ramming a straw up a guy's nose for reason other than self defense, shouldn't be able to own a straw, much less a gun.



Trying to use the old argument that the 2nd amendment protects us from an oppressive governement is about as lame as an argument gets when you take a look at the technology and killing machines our government has.

Even though it is a common used argument and the purpose of it is correct, the argument itself is very unsound and lame, and shouldn't be used if you want to present a decent argument.

Answer 10

If you want to be a strict constructionist then a literal reading of the 2nd amendment would mean that only people in a well regulated militia would have the right to bear arms. But the NRA doesn't want to follow the actual interpretation of the Constitution.

Answer 11

It was guaranteed by the founding fathers that knew law abiding civilians that were armed are necessary to keep the government honest. With out an armed nation than the politicians would be even more corrupt and we would have even less freedoms.

Answer 12

Yes, we do have the right to bear arms. The right is guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution.



The founding fathers saw the necessity. It continues today. No one has ever attempted to repeal this amendment. That means to me that there was never a vast majority of the population who wanted guns to be banned.

Answer 13

In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.





The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.



We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.



That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.



And this is how it is to be accomplished.



Amendment II



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.



mi�li�tia �� (m-lsh) KEY �



NOUN:



1 An army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers.

2 A military force that is not part of a regular army and is subject to call for service in an emergency.

3 The whole body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service.

Answer 14

Bear 'em and wear 'em. If a methed up crack head breaks into my house in the middle of the night, are the cops going to arrive in time to save me or my family? No. If I am walking in the park and muggers accost me at knife point will they? No. Police protection is for after the fact in most cases. After the fact can mean you are already dead. Am I paranoid? I live in a meth infested area. I call it practical.

Answer 15

Yes......the only way to ban firearms in the world is to stop making them world wide.....war included....otherwise there's always going to be an underground to where only criminals have access. If you think banning guns is going to stop the violence then research because knives and other weapons are just as lethal and they will resort to something else if violence is on their mind. Heck have a couple kids dead and 1 in serious condition and they used baseball bats and golf clubs. Gonna ban baseball and golf now because some moron can't handle his anger? House to house to collect all knives? Ban cars because some can't manage to drive sober and sane? It's our Constitutional right to protect ourselves. If you don't want one....you don't have to get one. I don't have one but I'm thankful I have the right to get one, if need be. It's not like they're forcing us to carry one if we don't want to.

Answer 16

No.



The 2nd Amendment was created because this country was dominated by vast expanses of land that civil servicemen (cops) couldn't possibly oversee. As a result, the founding father's wanted guns to be in the hands of civilian militia to make sure that good honest men, police themselves.



That was 200+ years ago. The country and landscape has changed DRAMATICALLY since then. There is no longer a need for the second amendment. And when these school shootings happen so frequently the logical and reasonable path of thought is to STOP the guns getting in the hands of these freaks...NOT to put guns in everyone ELSES hands so that people can pick and choose when they feel they should be a homicidal vigilante. That is NOT American and NOT the way the American judidical system works.



2nd Amendment freaks trump up their cause simply because they like to go out to the range, or the backwoods and shoot stuff. They are trying to justify their pathetic hobby.

Answer 17

The Law abiding citizen should be allowed to Bear arms as provided in the 2ND amendment, Criminals will always have fire arms and the only way American citizens can protect themselves is to own and train to use firearms.~

Answer 18

The right to bear arms in the constitution was expressly for the purpose of creating a militia of persons who would protect the homeland against British aggression.

Answer 19

The citizens have the right to bear arms to protect themselves from the government in the event that the government was overthrown or tried to rule the people and not be ruled by the people.

Answer 20

Yes, It's what the second amendment gives us as Americans

Answer 21

I would never own a gun, but that being said, it is not the people that obtain guns and permits legally that scare me.

Answer 22

Always

Take away guns from Americans and the only people who will have them are the criminals !!!!

If you didn't already know making firearms illegal will not make them inaccessible to the criminals who buy their guns illegally to begin with !!!!

Answer 23

Absolutly.......for self defense and to protect our families.....However.. Those who do should be responsible adults qualified to carry arms...and know to keep them out of reach of children.

Answer 24

They have a right to live in their own shooting gallery but they should quit running guns around the world and invading other countries as they so like to do.

Answer 25

remember that hitler made guns illeagle and look what hapened to the people

Answer 26

Yes, we are gonna need them in the upcomming racial war.