Cooper Dubuque
Alexa True
Thounsa Kerse
Damon
Gun Rights
Guns are a significant part of traditional American hobbies. The American people use guns for sporting purposes that range from hunting, to gun ranges and skeet shooting. It is also clear that some Americans do not want to possess guns solely for the purpose of sport, many feel it is necessary to obtain guns for protection and it’s their constitutional right to do so. Guns also provide a check against government tyranny as an armed citizenry. Unfortunately guns are also used unlawfully every day which has put these traditions at risk of termination.
Too take guns away entirely would be unconstitutional and unethical, however there are some precautions that can be taken to attempt to protect the American people while still allowing them rights to their guns. For example, background checks before gun registration would make it more difficult for criminals and the mentally ill to get ahold of guns and potentially use them for violence. Those who use guns for sport or protection would not be affected negatively by this. Also, limiting magazine capacity is an effective but nonintrusive contribution to the fight against mass shootings. When someone is set on doing harm they will find ways to do it, restricting gun laws only harms those citizens who acquire guns through legal channels for justified purposes. according to FBI crime statistics more people die from clubbing deaths then actual causaulities from rifles (http://nation.foxnews.com/gun-rights/2013/01/03/fbi-more-people-killed-hammers-clubs-each-year-rifles).
With that said, our group believes that people should be allowed to bear arms, but would be limited magazines and limited to handguns and certain shotguns. We feel that while it's hard to limit people to only a limited amount of guns and magazines, it also wouldn't make sense if people were allowed to get as many magazines or any type of gun they would like. If the intention was truly to be for protection, a person wouldn't need access to medium to long ranged weapons. As mentioned before, government tyranny is a possible motive for bearing arms. If the population is stripped of its defenses, then it would mean we are totally susceptible to the government if something or someone became corrupt. We feel that while the opposition to allowing people to have guns is that the crime rate may increase, we think that criminals will find a way to get guns regardless if they are legal are not, and even if it’s not guns, if someone wants to kill someone bad enough they will find a way. People often talk about the dangers of gun violence when there are many other more frequent types of violence.
I agree with your point that background checks would make it more difficult for the mentally ill and criminals to get ahold of guns. That was something my group discussed too. We figured that if you are buying a gun for the right reasons, and if you have nothing to hide, you wouldn't object to an in-depth background check and/or a longer waiting period between the time you purchased a gun and received it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your argument that background checks would help restrict the number of people in possession of guns. I believe that in your argument, you should have discussed the social cost that guns could have to people other than the intention of murder. Murder would be one reason to posses a gun but it is not the only reason why people shot and often killed. Expanding your argument regarding why restriction is necessary would support your conclusions.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it would be wrong to take guns away entirely. I don't think that limiting magazine capacity will have a major effect on how many people die in shootings. Also, the statistic that "more people die from clubbing deaths then actual causalities from rifles " only is true for rifles, but what about other types of guns that are more commonly used in shootings?
ReplyDeleteWhat is this irrational fear for tyranny? We have laws and organizations (e.g. UN)that protect citizens from these issues. Specially in these old highly developed governments.
ReplyDeleteI don't believe these recent restrictions have put gun ownership or traditions at risk of termination, instead these uprising policies want to raise the percentage of the public's safety. If these policies can make the probability of safety increase by 0.01%. As rational beings. we should sacrifice pleasure for safety.
I have to respectfully disagree with the start of your argument.
Overall you have a created a very thorough argument however the blog lacked organization and could have used a little more editing. Furthermore, to say that individuals bearing arms is a preventative measure for the government's tyranny is a bit of a stretch. America is on of the world's key nations, economically, scientifically and humanitarianism so it is very unlikely that it would fall into an "every man for himself" kind of atmosphere. Other highly influential nations would step in before citizens have to defend themselves in a post apocalyptic-style America.
ReplyDeleteA good post, but will we by limiting only criminals and mentally ill people get fewer school shootings etc.? We've seen the last years that also accordingly "normal" people with no records have done such things. So maybe this isn't enough, maybe it should be harder to obtain guns. But all in all a good post.
ReplyDeleteI agree that we should not take guns away because we as Americans should be able to have access to guns. The restrictions that you include are also strong including background checks so that those who are not qualified for guns cannot posses one and also that the amount of magazines one has should be limiting. Overall good blog post.
ReplyDeleteAlthough violence does take on many other forms, gun violence does contribute to that violence. My personal belief and preference is to completely eradicate guns, yet that is entirely improbable. I can agree with the restrictions your group has presented, as well as adding a extended process in which to obtain guns. Ultimately, as long as there are guns around, there will be gun violence.
ReplyDelete