The majority opinion stated, "It is not the role of this court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct". Their decision to make the possession of guns legal supports idea of the Framers for the right to bear arms that is stated in the Bill of Rights. While it does go along with what our founding fathers envisioned for our country, one might question whether or not that vision should change and adapt to new times and present circumstances.
Should the possibility of higher crime rates and violence in our capital be jeopardized in order to act in accordance with a law suggested over 200 years ago? The close vote shows that this decision was not an easy one and that the win was not hands down. So despite the law being overturned, it was only by one single vote and is left up to interpretation and scrutiny.
In my opinion the possession of handguns, even for the purpose of self defense and protection, can lead to cases of accidental death and violence within the home. Owning a gun may make the owner feel more safe, but does it make the city less safe as a result?
No law should be passed or enforced that could put people up for an even greater risk, because that, in itself, is unconstitutional.
1 comment:
Thankfully the Supreme Court upheld the right of U.S. Citizens to own guns for personal protection. Criminals and gangs will always find a way to get guns with or without laws. Striking down the ban allows lawful citizens the right to protect themselves.
For those that enjoy hunting game and the hobby of collecting firearms, banning the law against gun ownership was also the right thing to do.
Yes, inexperienced people that don’t necessarily know how to handle a gun shouldn’t own one in the first place and yes, accidents might happen. Should we place a ban on cars because there have been a few unfortunate accidents. No matter how many laws government might pass, accidents do happen and it’s a part of life that we can’t control. That is why there are gunlocks and gun cabinets, to prevent guns from getting into the hands of inexperienced handlers. The government does not have the right to blame the innocent by placing a ban on a one’s area of interest because crime rates are up. Everyone who has a gun isn’t the stereotypical serial killer.
On a personal level my grandfather and uncle own guns for the sport of hunting and they are less likely to kill a fly than to use a firearm to harm anyone. The benefits they gain from hunting are personally satisfying and economic, providing food for their families. We shouldn’t be judgmental and biased about anyone who has a gun. We should respect their interests and hope that they are extremely careful with their collectables.
No, we shouldn’t ban ownership of handguns but we should put severe restrictions on those that do own them. Suicidal victims, alcoholics, gangsters and those that don’t have a license to be handling the guns should be restrained from purchasing weapons. A person should be allowed to purchase a gun once they have demonstrated a sound mental state, proper storage and knowledge of gun safety. The right to bear arms was put in place over 200 years ago but I honestly feel that the general core of people has not changed over those years. Our environment has changed but who are we to say that there weren’t as many problems with guns back then but there was no media to inform everyone about those problems.
Post a Comment