U.S. President Donald Trump recently posted this Tweet about his thoughts on the Second Amendment. Many democrats believe that the Second Amendment should be repealed, especially considering the recent school shootings around the country. This Amendment deals with the issue of the right to bear arms. The president has been open about his opinion on the idea of repealing this Amendment. He is evidently not planning on doing so. The president has not been known for his advocacy for gun control. He states in his post that the country needs more Republicans this year, and that they must always hold the Supreme Court.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/28/us/politics/trump-second-amendment.html
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
1.) Do you think the Second Amendment should be repealed? Why or why not?
2.) Do you think there are ways besides repealing the Second Amendment to prevent gun violence, or is the repeal necessary?
3) Do you think gun violence will continue to worsen if the Amendment is not repealed?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteI personally think that people should have the right to own guns BUT there should be stricter regulations on it. This amendment should be improved as a lot has changed since when it was originally written, especially considering the current horrific mass shooting epidemic. While having, for say, a hand gun for defense or a rife for hunting may be justified I think it is ABSOLUTELY UNNECESSARY for any person to have an automatic or semi-automatic rifle. While people may say that it is good for self defense, if that was the case the police would be carrying automatics but they themselves don't carry it for protection so why would anyone else need it. They should be banned or if not it could be used ONLY in certified ranges and not be taken out anywhere else. Another thing that should be taken into consideration are bump stocks they basically help shoot a succession rounds of ammunition rapidly, which again is NOT NEEDED. Recently there has been a ban on them but, this rule is not enforced. It should be enforced more strongly. Also there should be no need of huge rounds of ammunition. And finally there should be a better background check on the buyers of the guns.
I don't think the second amendment should be repealed because that would cause chaos in America, which we do not need right now, however we should put stricter laws on gun control. If the US puts stricter laws on the second amendment it will create less commotion because there will still be the right to bare arms but it will be harder to gain the rights to have one so it will prevent shootings. This is a very hard situation to deal with but by making moves slowly and one at a time it can create an overall better solution in the future where we can get rid of school shooting and/or mass shootings and keep the country safe.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Anish that the second amendment should not be repealed, but that there needs to be stricter requirements and background checks on people who want to purchase guns. Automatic rifles should definitely not be sold to ordinary citizens, as I see no use for such a dangerous weapon in the US. I also believe that there shouldn't be any guns allowed anywhere, although I do understand that some people want a gun just for safety. According to The Guardian, 30 Americans are shot each day on average. We need to learn from other countries who have incorporated gun control, such as the UK, who brought the end to the right to own semi-automatic firearms after 43-year-old Thomas Hamilton killed 16 children between 5 and 6 years old. If this tragedy led the UK to enforce gun control, why hasn't the US invested in stricter gun laws and background checks, even after all the school shootouts that have happened this past decade?
ReplyDeleteSome people are advocating for a ban on all guns to prevent mass shootings from occurring, but I don’t think that approach is feasible. The firearms and ammunition industry is an important part of America’s economy. It is a multibillion dollar industry and employs more than 100,000 people in the country. Repealing the second amendment and thus banning all guns would not only be a nearly impossible task but would also negatively impact the US economy and job market. An alternative to repealing the second amendment would be to modify it so that ordinary US citizens can’t obtain weapons that are able to carry out mass shootings.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the second amendment should be repealed, mainly due to the fact that it was created for the benefit of the people, and meant as a safety precaution. The idea behind it was that everyone was able to have a protective firearm in case something were to happen. There are obviously ways to fix the problem, such as limiting the type of guns allowed. For example, you do not need an AR-15 to defend yourself against a few people, at most you would require a handgun. I do not think gun violence will rise up at any higher rate than it is currently, and the only reason it seems like such a big problem is the fact that the media only covers large-scale events such as these. There are thousands more killed in car crashes each year, but they never make it to the news.
ReplyDeleteWhile gun control is the main reason behind mass shootings, a full eradication of weapons would not be a good solution. While a repeal of the second amendment would make guns inaccessible, the second amendment also works to ensure means of civilian self defense. Congress cannot hope to fully ban guns and let the situation resolve itself because of a few reasons. Heroin is an illegal drug, but states like Ohio still face opioid epidemics. Making guns illegal will not stop people from getting their hands on fireams, and those who use these types of weapons for serious evil intent are probably way less likely to care about the ramifications of illegal gun possession or use. The only way to stop the gun problem is to make it gun ownership and purchase both tough and thorough. Many people own firearms for perfectly understandable reasons and means of self defense, but they need to be checked extensively before they are allowed to be in possession of a gun. I don't believe gun violence will worsen, but we do need to work on creating a situation in which gun violence can be limited and ultimately stopped.
ReplyDeleteLike many people have said above, the second amendment is a staple for all Americans and has been since our country was founded. Because of this, it should not be repealed. The right to bear arms helps people believe that they are safer and they should have the right to feel that way. However, there should still be restrictions on who gets to own an arm, because it possess the power to harm someone or people. Especially with all of the cases in which guns were abused, gun laws should help to act as a deterrent for those who would think of abusing the second amendment. Thus, the second amendment should not be stripped away from the Americans but it should not state that anyone who desires to bear an arm should have easy and unrestricted access to them.
ReplyDeleteI agree. The Second Amendment should not be repealed, and there should be sufficient background checks to ensure that only those who are qualified to own a weapon can acquire one. If we do not have these background checks, these weapons will cause more damage. Not everyone who owns a gun will use it to cause chaos and destruction, but we need to make sure that the people who have these negative motives can not just go and buy a gun.
DeleteI agree with many of the comments made that the Second Amendment should not and cannot be repealed given the established industry and its role in the creation of the United States. Nonetheless, times change and, as Anish pointed out, bump stocks and access to large amounts of ammunition should be prohibited if not under severe restrictions and scrutinizing background checks.
ReplyDeleteAs a supporter of the second amendment, I believe that it should not be repealed due to many reasons. One of those is to protect our country from a tyrannical government so we can keep our liberty. That is why some people have “assault” rifles so if the time comes we as a union can fight back against tyranny. Our forefathers didn’t create the second amendment for just muskets, or for hunting, but to allow the people of the union to be able to protect themselves and others from criminals. One prime example I like to use to defend the second amendment is the chaos of the LA Riots. From April 29-May 4, 1992 hundreds of riots ensued in LA due to the reactions of the acquittal of the officers in the beating of Rodney King. There was widespread looting and devastation in LA. Store owners, especially in Koreatown, were scared for their lives and their property. So many bought firearms to protect themselves, their family, and their stores. Most would put out signs that would state, “If you come close, you will be shot.” And the stores with those signs weren’t looted or set ablaze. But the stores that didn’t had a very high likelihood of getting looted and set on fire. If the second amendment is repealed, and another incident like the LA riots occurred, law abiding citizens would have a hard time defending themselves.
ReplyDeleteGoing along with what others have already established, repealing the second amendment and protecting its rights to bear arms removes a widely used methods of defense for many Americans. Instead, Congress should elaborate on the second amendment through carrying out measures such as requiring gunsmiths to do background checks or restrictions on arms in specific situations. These restrictions can involve public schools, especially due to the 17 school shootings that have occurred within the first three months of 2018. In this way, these policies would solve the specific side effects of the second amendment without entirely changing policy. At the same time, however, doing nothing to the Second Amendment, as Trump and the Republicans suggest, will also encourage people such as terrorists to exploit weapons and cause more violence to escalate, while repealing it entirely would only benefit Democrats and possibly lead to violent breakout against the law. In turn, the best approach to the second amendment between the Democrats and the Republicans would currently be to execute smaller policies, which would be all it takes to solve the issue.
ReplyDeleteBanning all guns from the US is not a logical path for the government to take. This will cause a lot of the outburst among US citizens. Repealing the second amendment is not going to work because it plays such a huge role in our industry with the creation of guns. However I do believe that the second amendment should be revised and people who buy guns should not only have sufficient background checks but also a thorough application process to minimize guns going into the wrong hands. The Second Amendment was created for defense and law abiding citizens should still have the right given to us by our Founding Fathers.
ReplyDeleteI do not think the Second Amendment should be repealed, as then the people with illegal guns would be much more powerful and be able to do more dangerous thing without much opposition. Expanding on the idea of background checks, people should not be allowed to have a gun if they have a criminal record or are mentally ill. To keep schools safer, there could be metal detectors and increased vigilance on campus security.
ReplyDeleteI believe the second amendment should not be repaealed but is in need of stronger regulations regarding the rights to owning weapons. Background checks should be provided before owning the fire arm as well as mental health checks. This small regulation could stop tragic events such as school shooting from occurring in the near future
ReplyDeleteI think its important to realize what an "amendment is." The constitution was written in 1787, and the 2nd amendment was then added to the original document in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights. This means that about 4 years after the constitution was drafted individuals felt it necessary to add to it. The main purpose and text of the 2nd amendments suggests that individuals may form militias to protect their state. Currently each state has different groups considered "well regulated militias" which the second amendment gives them the right to bear arms when the militia is needed. That's if you follow the text literately, which clearly isn't how we've adapted it today. I personally feel that statistically if there were less guns then there would be less fatal "accidents." Owning firearms just adds to the amount of guns on the street which adds to violence. I feel that if there were stricter rules and regulations preventing individuals from carrying firearms then there would be significantly less violence.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kelsey in that the Constitution, and it's a medments, are not the end-all-be-all of what the law should be in this country. Even in the century they were written in, it was widely regonized by the document's own architects that amendments could, and should, be made. So why today, can we not see the need for change on a ceturies old document? This is not to say that the second amendment should be repealed. I beleive that a vast amount of people in our country agree on the ideals of common sense reform in gun control, though some want it in more severe degrees than others. Abolishing the second amendment woud easily be considered crossing the line for many gun owners, but something must certainly be done.
ReplyDeleteI think the second amendment needs to be more regulated, as Kelsey stated. The original purpose of the amendment was to own a firearm if they were to form a militia, but it has become twisted in today's society; however, generations are becoming more self-aware and trying to induce change. What many Republicans/gun advocates fail to realize is that these are 18th century gun laws trying to regulate 21st century guns and people. We have evolved in different ways and our political state is very different from what it was back in the 1700's. It is appalling how our own president is reacting and his enthusiasm for guns, especially with these recent school shootings, each one becoming more and more deadly. Baby boomers treat millennials and Gen Z like children, saying that we have to silence ourselves, that we're too young to have these political opinions. Yet, Republicans are pro-life because they want to protect children, taking away the rights of the mother. But why protect the children before they're even real humans if you're not going to be concerned about their safety lifelong? Gun repeal has been proven extremely successful, such as in Australia but the government refuses to see these statistics because they'd rather protect their pieces of metal than human lives.
ReplyDeleteIt it time to start thinking about repealing. Our society is changing and so should out laws. they should be regulated at the least. Background checks need to be heavily relied upon. Guns are only harmful if they're put into harmful hands. As long as we can control who has access to guns, the second amendment is fine just the way it is. I believe everyone does have a right to bear arms, but there should be exceptions (like if your'e mentally not ready for one).
ReplyDelete