Sunday, June 22, 2014
Prompt No. 3 Openly carrying guns: Smart or Stupid?
Listen to the abour National Public Radio piece on the Open-Carry Gun movement in Texas. Do you think people should be allowed to openly carry their guns in public? The Second Amendment and the Supreme Court say that citizens do have the right to own a gun for protection, but does this right, in your opinion, mean people can carry their guns on them at all times, out in the open, everywhere?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
64 comments:
Okay, I'm going to break down the Second Amendment. First off, what does the Second Amendment really mean? It's impossible to know. This isn't only because it is so vaguely written, but because there are two versions the have been legitimized, both bearing distinctively different punctuation (which we all know can alter the meaning of a statement entirely). One version can be interpreted as it is the people that have the right to arm themselves, while the other version can be interpreted to state that it is the duty of the state to arm and REGULATE it's people. So to apply this to the question being asked, it really depends on which version you decide to use to defend the action of openly carrying an arm where ever and when ever. Let's go a little deeper. If you read both respected versions of the Amendment, you will notice both lack the definition of an "arm". So what is an arm? Did it refer to a simple Musket, or a machine gun (which the men responsible for the drafting of the constitution could not have even began to perceive)? So really you can argue that you don't have the right to openly carry (or even own) an arm that was designed after September 17, 1787. Now let's dig even deeper than these two arguments. Is it really a RIGHT to own and/or carry a firearm (we are assuming the term "arm" refers to any and all firearms, for arguments sake)? A persons rights can not be infringed upon, however a convicted felon cannot own or openly carry a firearm. Anyone with certain diagnosed mental disorders cannot own or openly carry a firearm either. If it is a RIGHT, why can't they? The answer is simple, it isn't safe to trust these people with firearms. But if that's the case, then were are taking away someone's ability to do something, which doesn't make that ability a right but instead a privilege.
The Second Amendment was created for citizens to have a means of protection for themselves. The average citizen is capable of going out and purchasing a firearm after a few background checks. This means that almost anybody without previous felonies or mental disorders can purchase a firearm. Here in California you have to receive a permit from the state to open carry, but I believe that open carry should not be legal anywhere in the United States. Even with the rigorous background checks, open carry can be very dangerous to the public. Let’s say one day one day two people begin to argue in public in a part of the U.S where open carry is legal. One has a firearm tucked into his waist. After a few harsh remarks from the other person, he pulls the gun on him and shoots him twice, killing him. What could have been a less harmful fist fight, just turned into a murder. All because open carry was legal in the area. I’m all for keeping a firearm at home, but it shouldn't be allowed outside of it.
Ed makes a great point saying the term “arm” does not have a straight forward definition, but let’s just say the Second Amendment protects old and new firearms. In these recent years, the problem of gun control has surfaced in an alarming rate and most suspects are being diagnosed with a mental disorder after committing a crime. I believe the people have the right to own a weapon under conditions of passing multiple tests and getting a background check as Steven mentioned, but I do not believe that it should be allowed for people to openly have a gun out in public. This is stupid because with a gun out you are making yourself an automatic target by the police, you are exposing little children to these harmful objects, and you are not proving anything by having a machine gun out. I understand why a person might have a weapon at his private property for protection but in public we already have people who protect us, and their name is the Police.
-Bronsin Benyamin
I'm okay with the second amendment that people should own arms, but as long as they want them for their own protection.Now i don't agree with people carrying guns out in the open I don't believe it would be wise to allow people to openly carry firearms because ultimately there are too many irresponsible people out there, and it would lead to at least a handful of tragedies just like the one of Sandy Hook in Newtown, Connecticut were Adam Lanza killed 20 innocent children and six adults, school staff and faculty, before turning the gun on himself,and this is just an example of what crazy people do with guns , and now imagine with that law , people will go more crazy and we aren't going to be able to tell who is the good guy or the bad guy. This would also make things much more difficult on law enforcement, who would then have to worry about every citizen that they encounter being armed.
-Regina Andres
I would say that the Second Amendment is a good idea, but just as Ed had pointed out, it is one that has different ways of looking at it. Living with a person who loves guns, I definitely hear a great deal of information about the Second Amendment and political issues that appear in that field. The Second Amendment gives us the right to "bear arms" as a way to defend ourselves and just as Ed shared, haveing a gun is more of a privilege than a right because they are not given to criminals or mental disorders. Now it is different to own a gun then to actually carry it around and use it whenever you feel like it. I will have to agree with Steven on this one because to allow people to openly carry guns in public would be a stupid idea. There are too many people in this world who are too naive and too irresponsible like Regina said. To allow people to openly care guns would only cause more problems, injuries, casualties, and accidents. There will be more crimes as well and it would be extremely difficult to find the culprit. I would say that we can own guns, but keep them at home. We don't need to carry guns around everywhere we go. That is the whole reason why we have the police and law enforcement. They were established so that they can protect us. This right does not allow us to take guns evrywhere.
There are many ways you can look at the Second Amendment. I believe that it can be good for our protection when we need it. But I agree that people should get a background check before being given any kind of arm. Regardless of whether you have a license to own a gun, they should not carry it around at all times, it´s truly not necessary, there are very low chances of someone really being in need of a gun at all times. I also agree with Bronsin that many gun control problems have increased lately, therefore carrying guns at anytime, anywhere is stupid. In the last couple of years there have been many accidents of big amounts of people being killed by someone who had a gun out in public. I think that the Second Amendment should only allow people to have guns in their home . If people still wish to carry guns at all times and feel that it is necessary they should be given a bigger list of requirements and different kind of license to be allowed to do this.
Sara, this "If people still wish to carry guns at all times and feel that it is necessary they should be given a bigger list of requirements and different kind of license to be allowed to do this," already exists in most places of the US.
If people truly feel there life is in legitimate danger at all times, and therefore have to carry a weapon on them everywhere they go, they have a problem. Would you really feel safer with a weapon on you, knowing someone could get ahold of it, knowing it could very well go off accidentally? Carrying a weapon on you because you feel threatened or unsafe is only making the issue even greater. The Amendment was written in a time when there was lots of turmoil, weapons were somewhat necessary in your home and with you physically everywhere you went. Now, especially in the US, there is no need for people to be walking around with guns strapped to there belt. We are at war in another country, not here at home. Also, like I previously stated, having a weapon on you only makes you a bigger target. Another reason people should not be carrying weapons around in public is because you are inducing fear into other people, who wants to be walking alongside someone with a gun on them? Not me. It's all fine and dandy to have a weapon in your home, it is in the end your property and you can protect your property any way you wish. The authors of the Second Amendment didn't think about the future when they wrote this particular Amendment, that is why there are various interpretations of this historical document.
-Isaiah Alberdin
People should not be allowed to carry guns in public as people carrying weapons in public for their own safety would lead to other people carrying guns in public for their own safety. If people know other people have guns on them in public, it could lead to greater conflicts and can lead to serious injuries or even death. Carrying guns in public should not be allowed as the negatives far outweigh the benefits. Your own public safety in carrying a gun doesn’t really work as other people would feel they would need to carry a gun themselves and if everyone has a gun in public, accidents can happen. Therefore, guns should not be allowed to be carried in public.
- Anthony Hoang
I agree the second amendment has a purpose and can be interrupted in many different ways but needs to be looked at with a perspective on current situations. The amendment was written at a time where in a way it was necessary to have some sort of protection at all times, but now look at the problems and losses guns have gotten us into. No matter how many background checks have been done on a person I don’t feel they should be able to carry their gun with them at all times even if they feel their life is in danger at all times. No one should have that strong of a need for a weapon. You are most likely in more danger carrying your gun at all times than without your gun. Carrying a gun at all times does not only create more danger for the person but also the people who surround this person. What if the person who is carrying the gun is a little forgetful or careless and the gun ends up in the hand of a child or someone who is not mentally stable? The amendment gives us the right to protect ourselves when needed not to show off our guns to the world.
-Jasmine Johal
While people do enjoy their liberty and the right to carry firearms around I feel that carrying them around openly the public is ridiculous. First people can see a man openly carrying a gun as a threat to them or their family. If somebody is going to be swinging their gun around while walking in the streets then the person who sold them the gun is also heavily at fault. The background checks on people need to be more precise if we are having people parading their guns and ammunition around in the open. The open carrying of guns around children can also provide a negative effect towards them. If you look at places like Compton and Detroit where they are thick with gun violence you'll also notice that much of the younger generation will have adapted as well. Its no wonder why the U.S. is the leading country in terms of gun violence.
The Second Amendment was written in 1791 when both firearms and the way our society was regulated were vastly different compared to more than 200 years later. This law was written to ensure the safety of oneself and his or her property. I agree that after following thorough background checks, we should be allowed to own a gun on our own property if that makes us feel safer (like Ed said, this would – and should – make gun ownership a privilege because frankly no one should be selling just anyone a gun as soon as they ask); but to openly carry it out in public is a terrible idea, as it is prone to cause more problems than solutions. Like Isaiah offers, there is probably something wrong if you feel unsafe everywhere you go and are compelled to carry a firearm with you at all times, especially if public gun ownership is not common. Similarly, if given the choice, I would not like to walk next to a complete stranger who is openly carrying a firearm, especially keeping in mind that people can be unpredictable and that most, if not all, public/mass shootings are not anticipated by civilians. This mindset is the complete opposite of the law’s intended effect. Although perhaps making the gun holder feel more secure, everyone around that person probably feels unsafe. Considering everyone without a firearm may be feeling this way, perhaps the fear persuades them to purchase a firearm as well, thus creating a domino effect where everyone is afraid of everyone else with guns so decides to purchase one for open carry at all times. This could be an extreme example, but now all of a sudden you’re surrounded by dangerous firearms. Really, if you were afraid of standing next to one person with a gun, would being surrounded by people with guns make you feel any better? The scenario Steven provided is one which does happen from time to time, and would only increase in occurrence if more people publicly possessed firearms. Again, people can be unpredictable and some don’t deal well with anger. Acting impulsively and firing at someone just because you have a gun puts everyone at risk. In the end, open carry neither ensures safety of oneself nor others.
Honestly, there are so many ways to protect yourself without the use of a firearm. Society has immensely changed since the Second Amendment was made and it is a idiotic, but reasonable idea to own a gun in case of an emergency. Nevertheless, violence is never an acceptable solution to any problem and empowering a policy that allows people to openly carry guns only adds to the countless potential threats. It’s not a reasonable possibility to think that since everyone can carry a gun, no violence will occur, since a Mutual assured destruction principle is applied. Not everyone in the world has the same mentality of using firearms for their own safety and it is implied that people may use guns for their own personal gains and corrupt plans. The thought of carrying guns openly for the sake of your own safety against unexpected threats is far outweighed by the numerous negative consequences that result from the same concept of public possession of firearms.
The purpose of the second amendment is so that we can protect ourselves with guns, that being said it makes sense to carry guns. If we can only have guns inside our locked houses what’s the point of having them at all. If you feel you need a gun to feel safe the constituting grants you that right. Although there have been many incidences with guns I believe that the guns themselves are not the problem. I do believe we should be stricter on gun laws and who can legally get one, but like I said I feel it’s pointless if you can’t protect yourself outside your house.
The Second Amendment allows people to protect themselves by caring guns. A agree that people should be able to protect their property from intruders, but they don't need to carry one everywhere. Guns are meant to hurt people, so why carry them everywhere? I believe that it shouldn't be right to let everyone carry a gun, it should be a privilege. If it's a right then everyone gets one, but not everyone does. Therefore it's a privilege. I agree that not everyone should have the gun. The criminally and mentally insane should not have be able to have guns, and they're don't. But that means that not everyone has that right, and if it's under the constitution, it should apply to everyone. People shouldn't carry guns everywhere they go, and not everyone needs a gun. Not everyone deserves a gun.
The debate over gun laws has been very much in the center of our attention for the past few years, especially since there have been much more mass shootings. I believe that citizens do have the right to own guns for protection, but there has got to be a boundary which prevents them from carrying their guns everywhere they go. If you're gonna go pick up your child from school, it's not necessary to bring your pistol on your hip. There is a time and place to carry a gun and these need to be outlined so kids are not exposed to these weapons at a young age. If that doesn't work, it should be illegal to flaunt your gun out in the open, and it should be concealed.
-Varun Kaushal
Like Ed pointed out the second amendment is vaguely written. Does it mean that people are allowed to carry firearms for self defense or that the nation requires a militia? First at this point the nation has achieved a strength that to get to a point in which a militia is necessary we would have no people to put into the militia. So, by not allowing access to firearms you aren't restricting the well maintain militia the nation no longer requires a well maintained militia. Second, if someone argues that the firearm is for self-defense; the fact that the person has a firearm of any kind would only increase the chances of him getting shot by someone else who used that same excuse to get a hold of the gun he used to shoot the first guy with in the first place. Ed makes multiple great points, one by saying that Madison never even conceived weapons like machine guns however we are assuming that he would have included that kind weapon in the second amendment, another by pointing out that we say it's a right, but the truth is that it is a privilege.
The decision to regulate guns should be the states and counties jurisdiction and not the federal governments. States and counties should decide whether to trust and train their citizens to openly carry a gun. However, in my opinion, during their ruling they should keep in mind the public areas that will greater benefit from not having an open gun policy on the property. For example, a school with children would be to risky because of a situation like the Colombine High School 1999 shooting in Colorado to occur. Therefore the open carry policy is a controversy subject and in some areas its accepted in others it is not.
~Katherine Neal
Humans are far from perfect and often let their emotions get the better of them. We don't live in a perfect world where everyone loves each other. If I see someone carrying a firearm in public my first thought is going to be, "Who's going to die." not 'Who's going to be saved". We don't live in a society where its necessary to carry around firearms all day. Many find guns to be unsettling, not reassuring. If someone wants to own a gun that is fine with me, but openly carrying it in public is a hazard to everyone. Guns should be kept at home and not on the streets.
The second amendment was created for citizens to have the right to bear arms. This is the definition we currently interpret from this amendment because it is very vague. When it states that we have the right to bear arms, as Ed stated is it that the people have the right themselves or is it that the state arms and regulates people. It is a very vague amendment, but in today's modern day our society has interpreted the amendment to saying we the people have the right to bear arms. Luckily acquiring these weapons requires background checks and enables people to know whether or not if the person is suited to owning a gun.I think that people do have the right to own a gun out in public even if we have law enforcement. It gives a sense of extra security and it brings up the question that if they weren't allowed in public, but allowed at home what is the point of owning a gun. If faced with danger out in public and your gun is at home you are in danger. Having a gun for people to carry in public is alright. -Markos Kassahun
The second amendment states that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Its main purpose usually servers as self-defense, stating that citizens have the right to protect themselves with a weapon. However, when it was created, machine guns and assault rifles were not even a thought let alone a problem. With recent shootings at places like schools and military bases, openly carrying a firearm doesn’t look like that too good of an idea. Thought there are restrictions for who can own a firearm, people still get ahold of them so limiting their sale is probably ineffective. Possession, however, should be limited. As stated in the NPR article, a mother told the gunmen, “There are children here”. There should be restrictions about guns being in the open, as it isn’t right for people to be showing around guns in places such as Chilli’s.
-Francisco Alvarez
In my opinion, people should not be allowed to carry guns in PUBLIC. I think that having them locked up in their homes for safety is okay though. Even though the Second Amendment states that we the citizens have a right to bear arms, that does not give people the right to hold on to guns while walking the dog, or going to work. Guns do not make people feel safe, as a matter of fact, they scare people, and give people impulses to do soemthing hasty becae they felt threatened by that gun on your hip. Guns should be locked up in a place where a responsible adult can only have access to it.
-Sham Abrha
I do not think people should be allowed to openly carry their guns in public because there can be many dangers involved with it. Yes, the Second Amendment and Supreme Court states citizen's rights to own a gun for protection but that doesn't mean people can carry firearms out in public. What would the ones who don't have firearms on them do? Those people will feel unsafe and be influenced to carry it for their own safety and protection as well. If this happens then any controversy between people may cause them to use their weapons to defend themselves. This will lead to accidents as well as an outbreak, therefore, Citizens carrying weapon for their protection in public should not be allowed.
- Richard Ting
Absolutely not. Under no circumstances should it be legal for regular civilians to simply brandish their guns in public. Yes, we have a right (although I agree with Ed that it's more of a privilege) to be in possession of arms but to bring it out in public whenever and wherever one pleases should not be allowed. Guns aren't the issue, people are. However, guns give people more access and more power to be an issue. What does it say about us as a society and as human beings when we have to rely on a machine which was created and designed to kill to protect ourselves? If guns were allowed to be carried in public for protection, and everyone with a gun does so, then that in itself is already a disaster waiting to happen. If everyone is protecting themselves, it will be at the cost of another. Especially to the people who are not armed and do not have guns. Everyone has different levels of control, some more than others, but everyone has a breaking point. If everyone who owns a gun brings it wherever they can, and when just one person reaches that breaking point, mass destruction can and will occur. Bringing them out into the public eye is not only a blatant safety hazard for everyone, but will only add to the paranoia and hostility we see every day flashed over and over on the news. ~ Huong Le
The Second Amendment simply states the right to bare arms. The statement is rather vague but most translate the meaning as the right to own guns. There should be no reason to carry a gun in public. A gun should be owned to protect yourself not harm others. In public, your protection should be in the hands of the police officers and the trust that your fellow humans would also believe in the unnecessary need to carry a gun in public. There are many other ways to protect yourself than by resorting to carrying a firearm around in public. Choosing to carrying a gun openly in public would causes fear and distrust in others leading to distress and chaos and wouldn’t relieve you of the fear to protect yourself, not with multiple pairs of eyes focused on you and your gun.
I strongly believe that people should be allowed to have guns with them in order to protect themselves from intruders. I do however feel that having a gun out in the public is not a good idea. Our crime rates will skyrocket if we carry guns out in the public. People can easily take advantage of LEGALLY having their weapon out in public, buy killing people, or robbing stores and banks. With this, I do feel that in order to own a gun, one must pass a substantial amount of tests to ensure that the consumer has the mental "excellence" to not go on a mass murdering spree, or harm themselves. In conclusion, people should be allowed to own guns if they are properly trained, but they should not be allowed to openly carry it in public.
- Michael Gelagay
Personally, I think guns should be prohibited. I understand that we have the right of self defense, but there are many other ways we can protect ourselves without using guns. Plus, we can call 911 anytime we don’t feel safe. Giving people the right to own a gun leads to more crimes than to help them protect themselves, such as the Sandy Hook incident. Some people who knew about the guy in that incident so well said he was a good guy; they did not know he had mental problem. That’s why we can never trust anyone who has a gun, and it is not safe to be around those people. Allowing guns in this country has resulted in many crimes and fears already, letting people carry guns openly is more dangerous. It is like helping criminal to kill more people. For those people who don’t feel safe and need protection, find or learn other ways to protect themselves. Carrying a gun openly doesn’t increase the safety for anyone, including the person who has a gun.
Our news stations are filled with shootings after shootings, why put lives at stake even more? I believe that guns should not be carried around in public areas. By means of protection, the Second Amendment states that the people have the right to "bear arms" but there is nothing written that specifically says to hold a gun. The right to bear arms could branch out to many ways of interpretation, as Ed and others had pointed out. Protecting yourself, your family, your friend or your neighbor does not mean carrying a gun by your side at every second. With our society's desensitization from tv, movies, etc. these extremely dangerous weapons may not be taken with the correct precautions leading to more deaths and damage. Having a gun so easily usable if carried around everywhere would only support that theory even more.
I do believe those should be able to obtain a gun through a thorough process, but not be able to walk around with it. It's just too dangerous and more life threatening if something just doesn't go right.
The Second Amendment, one of the vaguest, allows for citizens to keep and bear arms. Although this I do not believe this right extends to everyday wearing and use of guns. People should not have the ability to carry their guns on them at all times. It would be a danger to themselves and everyone around them. Also wearing the gun where it is clearly visible raises fear and tension which can cause people to act irrationally. It also defeats the purpose of law enforcement. Why do we need police to protect us when we can ‘protect’ ourselves anytime and anywhere? If every person who owed a gun carried their gun on them guns would be easily accessible to reach out and steal, and in some cases use. Guns are just a danger to the public and while we reserve the right to own one if we feel the need to we should not start treating them as an everyday accessory.
-Samantha Salazar
While people should be able to fend for themselves in case that the government turns against them all, but in times of what seems to be peace, I think that firearms are unnecessary. At the same time, for those who live in rural areas where there are carnivorous creatures, firearms come rather handy. But with at least 74 school shootings happening in 2014 alone, there should be reform in gun ownership policies, school security, and what we as a nation do with those who need treatment for psychological issues. That being said, since those of us who live in suburban areas usually don't need guns, and some people like me get disturbed when we can see open lot badly concealed weapons(because I know you're not happy to see me). Also if open carry groups want to walk in to Starbucks and Chipotle, they'd better do it the right way; in Uggs and leggings. I frown upon urbanites who want guns.
Guns have become a major issue in our society. Because of all these shootings that have been going on the past years. People should keep weapons at home to protect themselves but I think people should not be allowed to carry guns in public. Carry a gun could be dangerous but its for self defenses. Most people know when to use them and use it properly under right circumstances. Allowing to have weapons in their homes isn't a bad idea, in case of an emergency like a thief, they should have the right to protect themselves if the thief is trying to hurt them. - Nhi Nguyen
Citizens should not carry their guns with them at all times, it's simply not necessary. The gun laws in Australia are much stricter than those in the United States and as a result there are less gun-related crimes. This goes to show that the less guns are out there, the less gun violence there will be. Guns do not need to be brought along during family outings or when someone needs to run to the grocery store. They should be limited to times when people really feel that having a gun with them is essential.
I agree with Ali and Elena, but also have my own opinion as well. Citizens should not be carrying their guns with them at all times, but should only if they are trained and certified to use them. People that hold guns with them that aren’t a police officer or some sort of legal protector cause many civilians to feel unsafe when people are around them. I agree with Ali when he had said that the background checks on these civilians with guns should be more precise and go more in debt with the person who is trying to make a purchase for a weapon. Guns should only be carried by a civilian only when they are in a state at where they need protection and should only be used for that particular reason.
- Daniel Negron
It is a persons right to own a gun for safety but they should definitely be restricted on carrying it around in public. If people were to carry their guns around with them it would make civilians feel uncomfortable and unsafe. We already have police officers around who carry guns to protect us so if everyone were to carry around a gun for protection it would defeat the purpose of the officers. There is already too much gun violence going on in the US and we need to limit it by restricting the gun laws. The government needs to protect civilians by not allowing people to carry guns around in public.
The Open Carry Movement is silly. At least in my opinion that is. Wanting to have a gun wherever you go is completely unnecessary, and can escalate everyday problems even further. An argument about whether you took someones spot can result in a gunfight, or someone getting cut off on the highway could result in a GTA-esk gun chase. Now of course, any sane person wouldn't do these things, but as we have seen in previous cases involving guns, it isn't that hard to get a hold of a firearm. So yeah, I think they second amendment should allow people to own guns, Citizens shouldn't be able to walk around the city wielding firearms.
As the second amendment states. A citizen has the right to bear arms. Any citizen should be able to own a lethal weapon like gun only if it's legal to do so. Although if they carry it in public, I think it is wrong to do so. If people had guns on them in public then it would make other people feel unsafe and it would also frighten little kids, as to what happened in that terrible tragedy in sandy hook elementary, nobody should be able to carry guns in public besides authorized personal from the government.
-Louis Bellido
In my opinion, the 2nd ammendment is justifiable where gun owners should be allowed to carry their weapons in public. It only makes sense that they are able to if we pass that law in the first place because it is contradictory if we allow them to have guns to protect themselves but not let them carry the weapon so they feel secure. Would I feel more safe if that part of the law did not allow their weapons to be in public? Of course. But at the same time, an example can be used with any law, you probably will not agree 100 percent with what it has to say but at the end of the day the law was passed to only benefit the people.
I believe people should be allowed to openly carry firearms. Studies have shown that in areas where it is legal to do so, crime rates go down. This should not come as a shock as people would be much more hesitant to commit crimes against people who are armed. Carrying around a firearm would thus increase peace in the area as long as the people who hold them are in a perfect mental state. Background checks should increase and become much more efficient in tracking down possible mental illnesses. As long as the mentally ill do not possess firearms, I believe it should be okay for civilians to openly carry a firearm as they can use it to ward off any potential threat just by merely having the gun. We would have to put a great deal of trust in our society to use them appropriately.
-Luis Godinez
Luis, crime rate goes down because everyone is afraid. Is that really a way to live, fearing all your neighbors?
The Second Amendment grants us the right to keep and bear arms for our own safety; so I don’t see a point in owning a gun for your safety if it can only be kept at home. I feel like people have the right to carry around a gun with them, if they feel that they need to. How is owning a gun going to help you if it’s at home and you’re being assaulted on the side of the road? With this being said, there should be a restriction as to what types of gun can be carried in the open because carrying around an assault riffle or an AK-47 is absolutely unnecessary. -Vicky Le
The second amendment states that citizens have the right to bear arms but, wielding a weapon out in the open is sure to create conflict and tension. Carrying a gun on you is enough to make a you feel secure but, walking with the gun in public can make others feel uneasy and can make young children feel unsafe. There is no reason to have your gun out unless there is danger harming you. Small arguments between people can have deadly results, especially if one is intoxicated. Openly bearing an arm has more risks than benefits. What is one benefiting from by carrying their gun unconcealed?
The second amendment is vague and doesn't say the average citizen should be allowed to enjoy an open gun policy anywhere or everywhere in the U.S. As verified the average citizen is allowed to own a gun given he or she can pass all of the requirements. The potential for safety and sense of security is huge if the everyday person could carry guns out in the open , but I also know that the risk for danger nationwide would also be massive. To trust a citizen without a call of duty such as a policeman or military connection,with a gun is unreasonable. Furthermore it would undermine some of the responsibility entrusted to our everyday officers and that could cause all types of problems with authority in the U.S. It is safe to say that a sense of security is not worth potential loss of life and anarchy that would be forthcoming ,so its not the greatest idea and is not clearly protected under our vague second amendment.
The Second Amendment gives you the right to own and carry a gun, let's say that is a given. Now there are some of us who take advantage of this right and some of us that don't and that's fine. The problem is the people that have to take things too far. The problem with the movement in Texas is that it is not helping gun activists but instead hurting them. What do you gain open carrying a gun to Chipotle with your buddies? Oh that's right, that gets a whole bunch of restaurants to ask that you stay out of there restaurants with a weapon at all, scares customers, and gets a majority of people to call you an idiot because there is no reason to open carry at Chipotle. If they had stuck to concealed carrying there'd be no argument and a lot more people may actually be in your favor that the average person can own a gun.
In the Second Amendment, it grants the citizens to legally bear arms for protection so I agree that people should carry their guns freely. However, I do have some moral reservations and trust issues about this topic. First of all, there should be a test to see if someone is even mentally okay to even carry a gun in general, as my man Michael said. I don't want an insane person showing his firearm in public around innocent lives. And if you're going to carry around a giant machine gun strapped to your back, that's makes you look like a big idiot. Why would you ever need it?! I believe that you can have your gun out, but let's be practical. To me this seems like a social display of " Look, that guy has a big gun, so I'll buy a bigger gun to show off." It;s just another way for conceited people to show everybody else how much cooler they look with a gun. But we would never even have this problem if everyone just got along and argued peacefully with words, not weapons.
-Evan Conry
Like Steven G. said, yes the Second Amendment was created to provide the individual with a way to protect themselves, but it is the 21st century, there are PLENTY of alternatives to protect oneself than there were back in 1787 such as pepper spray or even a taser. I agree with a person having a gun at home but disagree with someone openly carrying one in public. Agreeing again with Steven, despite having numerous background checks, it is still not safe to carry around such a strong weapon. The person who feels unsafe needs to also remember that he/she is not the only one able to acquire a weapon, the other individuals who are making him/her feel unsafe are able to acquire them too.
With the second amendment there are many ways too look at it because I do agree with the second amendment, but some look at it differently then others. I think most if not lots of our streets are safe, but some people make it unsafe sometimes, so people think they have to carry a gun at all time out on the streets at all times. There are too many irresponsible people out there that use this amendment for granted. For example the Colorado Movie Theater shooting where 24 year old James Holmes killed 12 people, 30 people remained hospitalized, 11 of them in critical condition, and 58 of them injured. This and other incidents show how irresponsible and unsafe people can be with the "right to bear arms." Many young children are being exposed on how bad it is with these weapons, and aren't showing them what comes out of it. People definitely buy guns to protect themselves, but hurt others majorly also. Every day there are gang violence and shootings all over the place. In my opinion I don't think they need to carry there weapon out in the open because there's always that quick moment where things can go wrong and you may not mean it such as the Trayvon Martin incident.
Guns would only marginally count as any sort of protection if you were only able to possess them while on your own property. Openly carrying guns, small guns that could only be used for self defense (not hunting or anything else a gun could be used for), should be allowed however, obtaining a gun should not be as easy. There are very good arguments against people being allowed to openly carry guns but most would be invalidated if it were significantly more difficult to buy or gain possession of a gun. Guns in public are only an issue when they aren't ACTUALLY being used for self defense. When those who would use them for anything else are able to not only get a gun but a license to carry their gun in public, then we have a problem. Sadly that is the position we are currently in. We should be regulating gun sales and licenses but not entirely keeping people from carrying their guns.
I was out of town from the 19th - the 29th which is why this response is posted so late.
The Second Amendment was created so citizens will have means to protect themselves. It doesn't state what way citizens should protect themselves. Now with the whole gun issue, yes it is protected under the Second Amendment, but carrying it in public at all times! That will be a huge problem because some people can not be trusted with guns. If people were to be carrying a gun at all times there will be trust issues in the communities, some people will take advantage of this and commit crimes. Take the Colorado shooting for example, more of these incidents will take place. Instead of carrying guns in public, people should carry Pepper Spray. Some people won't know how to shoot a gun and they will shoot the wrong person. Guns should only be allowed at homes because at home you are by yourself and in public there is other people and cameras. Guns should only be kept at home and not be carried in public.
I do agree that the the Second Amendment can definitely be interpreted differently. I think people should not be allowed to carry arms in public or at all because there's so much responsibility that comes with guns. Yeah there's all these forms and other things you have to do before someone can own a gun but that doesn't determine the limits a person is willing to go. How is anyone suppose to determine if you'll go into some type of psychotic rampage in the next month when your relationship goes down the drain because you claim to be emotionally scarred. The dangers could be endless of course guns aren't the only way we can go and hurt or kill someone but it takes away from the bunch. I believe that the government or security (police, security guards, etc.,) should have guns. People are very irresponsible. So no, I do not believe that people should carry them everywhere. But I am not completely set in stone with my opinion either, there sure are risks to the public not having guns.
The second Amendment supports the natural right of self defense and because of that people can keep and bear arms. I personally believe that people should be able to purchase or own a gun, but since these guns have become really dangerous and it has become a handy tool for serial killers or people who have mental problems there should be more restrict rules. For example there should be a through background check for whoever wants to purchase a gun , another problem that should be fixed is that assault weapons or semi-automatic guns should be banned and it should be used only for military. I also believe that carrying guns in public places such as stores, shops, restaurants and etc. should become illegal.
One again involving one of the amendments, this time this involves the second amendment, the right to bear arms. This amendment was created because they wanted to give citizens something the protect their selves with. But do we always use it for protection? Even though citizens may hold weapons in public others citizen will not be comfortable. Lets look at other disasters where people abuse the second amendment, Santa Barbara shooting, Dark Knight movie massacre, and the most infamous Colombine. We also have to think about the law enforcement, how they need guns to assist them with their job.
Even though I agree with the Second Amendment to be able to own weaponry, I believe that it shouldn’t be taken to a public place that can cause havoc. If people knew someone had a weapon with them in public, it can surely cause a riot which can lead to many problems. If people were freely able to possess a gun in a public manner, serious injuries can occur and sometimes result to death. To own a gun or any weaponry should be used as safety or for those who like to collect guns, rather than having it to flaunt around.
- Melvin Chu
The Second Amendment does state that one MAY OWN A GUN, but no where else does it state that it is ok to walk around with one at all times. I understand that every state is in control of making its own decisions, but that doesn't mean its ok, the only people who are allowed to even walk around with a gun would be the police. I also understand that incase of an emergency one wants to feel safe while being on the streets, but making people fear you isn't the way to do it. Also when the states make these decisions don't they ever consider how it will affect the children? I believe its wrong to having kids being exposed to guns, making them think its ok to always have one when in fact they are unnecessary. I personally don't believe in guns i feel they inflict way more violence. Especially the U.S., that has in my opinion a major gun problem, no other countries in the world have as big of a problem with guns. By allowing people to carry a gun everywhere has its downside; it could be used improperly, it could start conflicts between people, a person could shoot another person by accident etc. People say they own a gun for protection purposes, but don't fully understand the dangers of it
-Sabrina Vargas (out of the country)
It's ridicoulous how we want to carry guns in public, its pure irresponsability because we already have enough accidents with people having guns at home and not using them responsibly and therefor if thois is allowed than there would be more cases like the trade bomb martin case , sandy hook, and aurora ,people are very impulsive when they are enraged , so if a person gets mad at someone and they are out in public, and they are carrying a firearm and one of them just decides to shoot there would be a tragedy. so I therefor disagree with people carrying guns out in public
-Miriam Juarez
All citizens deserve the right to bear arms that the second amendment gives us. It is human instinct to protect ones home and if a gun fills that requirement while giving one the power to save their life then it should be allowed. But as we see more and more of these public shootings, rules and regulations seem to be the best solution. Which brings me to the this argument of carrying weapons out in public. Even the sane can get out of control once in a while, how is it a good decision to give this hate, depressed, or angered individual the right to take a gun in pubic in that state. Basically, guns should be a home emergency thing, not something to be legal outside where casualties can be made.
-Christian Trujano
Having the right to bear arms and carrying guns out in the public and wherever you go are two complety different things. Carrying guns out the public may cause many citizens to feel unsafe and not protected and children are always out and about and its not a nice environment for them. There are many unsafe citizens that don't use precaution and a tradegy may happen. Having guns out in the public is something that shouldn't be happening because its dangerous
Though the Second Amendment states you have the right to protect yourself and bear arms, I do not believe it is necessary to carry your weapons around wherever you go. People with no self control who carry around the guns, may act out and use the weapon improperly. They could harm another human being. This would cause utter chaos on the streets. You have to consider if people had the right to carry their weapons everywhere they attend, gangsters, mentally ill and people who are uneducated in gun safety will abuse this right the bear arms. Another problem with the right to bear arms wherever you feel like is the fact it can take away crucial problem solving skills. People will see the weapon as a way to solve their problems. A man gets angry with another man and shoots him instead of talking the problem out and solving the main issue. In conclusion, The Second Amendment does state you have the right to bear arms, but one would be simply uneducated if they brought it everywhere they went.
- Luis Plascencia
It is the people's right to arm themselves. They should be allowed to protect themselves at all times. If anything, once someone reaches a certain age they should be trained and issued a firearm. Everyone should be assigned only 1 firearm that is to be on their person at all times. This might make it easier for lunatics to go on massacres but, there would be more guns to combat them. If however we removed and banned guns entirely, only the lunatics would get their hands on guns.
I think that gun regulation should be a bit more strict; in some areas more than others. Though it is a right for an American to own a gun doesn't mean everyone should. Obviously there are tremendous amounts of people with mental illnesses or who are just not responsible enough to carry a loaded weapon around with them. It would simply be a safety hazard to anyone around those individuals. Also, though the type of arm is not specified in the Second Amendment it seems like common sense to me that something like an assault rifle isn't necessary for self defense in most cases. I think that carrying these types of weapons so openly is part of a recipe for a high-tension, and therefor, a high risk society.
Post a Comment