"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," the founders wrote. However, controversy has arisen as to how the second amendment must be interpreted, whether it means that people individually have the right to a gun, or the creation of a military to protect the citizens.
Several times, in the history of the United Sates, this nation has been involved in situations where the sovereignty and security of the country has been threaten by other external forces, that is why the creation of a military and naval force is needed. The creation of the police department, whose main purpose is to protect citizens among society itself. These institutions have strict regulations of their own use of gun control and well trained personnel, demonstrating that they would ever hardly hand a fire weapon to someone without the authority to use it. However, the other side of the interpretation argues for the people itself to be able to own and carry a gun, claiming that it is only for “self defense purposes.”
Many times, guns fall in the hands of outlaws who perpetuate crime and violence as they go along robbing houses, stores or any other places and firing their guns against other gang members; thus, becoming a serious threat to the safety of American citizens. In some states of the United Sates gun control is not well defined and barely regulated, stimulating the cause of offenses against individuals. In Tucson, Arizona, 2011 a person fired his gun, injuring 19 people, killing 6 of theme aggressor, was arrested. After days of investigation on his personal record, conclusions were made about him qualifying him as “mentally ill.” People like him, live within our own society and we cannot change that; however, we can change our laws so that guns will not be available for people who accidentally or deliberately can cause damage to society such as the Arizona aggressor.
No comments:
Post a Comment