Not My GunEssay Preview: Not My GunReport this essayNot My Gun.Gun control has been a major political playing card in American society since the early Twentieth Century. There are three sides to the gun control debate; those for gun control, those against gun control and those who sit in the middle believing there should be some limitations, but as long as their Second Amendment right is not infringed upon. Both parties either for or against gun control are firm believers of what they are fighting for, and adamant about getting their point of view across to as many people as possible. Is the prohibition of handguns in the United States a realistic solution? Can handgun prohibition be effectively enforced? What would the repercussions of handgun control be in the near future? I do not believe one hundred prohibitions of handguns is a realistic idea, nor will it solve all the problems associated with firearms.
The prohibition of handguns goes all the way back to 1934, where firearms were taxed excessively compared to the value of the firearm itself. In the mid Twentieth Century, there was an increase in the call for gun control after the assassinations of high profile politicians and activists in the United States. In the 1980s and early 1990s with the attempts to assassinate more high profile politicians, there were more calls for gun control. With all the lobbyists battling and the outcry for stricter government control, the United States government has not been able to do the one thing certain groups within this
country want, which is a complete ban on handguns by anyone other than law enforcement officers. In order to successfully accomplish this goal, all the supporters of gun control and their lobbyists would need for the rest of the country to voluntarily give
up their Second Amendment Right, ÐThe right of the people to keep and bear Arms guaranteed by the Founding Fathers of the United States.Giving up individual rights guaranteed to the citizens of this country through the Bill of Rights, in order to appease certain groups could possibly cause catastrophic problems to come up in the future. By voluntarily surrendering our Second Amendment Right, the people of this country could be opening a door for activists, lobbyists and politicians to start new Ðwars on, just like the ÐWar on Guns. This could be the beginning of what could possibly be looked upon as the dismantling of the Bill of Rights, thus creating a Fascist nation. Individuals have the right to protect themselves from the criminals looking to either do them harm, destroy personal
The NRA and “Gun Owners of America” are a well-known pro-life group, and one of the main concerns voiced by the NRA as it relates to banning the “assault weapons” in firearms from the United States. The NRA’s gun laws are based on a belief in “right to bear arms” which was articulated by the founder of the organization in 1857: “It shall be allowed unto the fathers and their elect that they may carry a weapon in their own hands, and be armed only for a specific purpose.”
NRA.org’s letter to Congress states the following:
It is with great care that we have issued the following statement:
“We believe that a national debate about a proposed National Firearms Act (NFA) that seeks to restrict the right of our people to own, operate and exercise their Second Amendment right has become too radical to pass any form of legislation for the common good or the administration of justice, and that we will no longer be able to agree on this important subject. We look for ways to make this case more accessible, easier on, and more convincing by moving forward with changes that would allow the American people to decide for themselves what is an issue for their lives.”
In this letter to Congressman, the NRA calls upon Members and Administration to express their concern with the proposed law and to join in discussions on the legislation.