LEGITIMATE RESTRICTIONS ON GUN OWNERSHIP

Are there any legitimate restrictions on gun ownership?



Are there any legitimate restrictions on gun ownership?

Thesis Statement

Legal restriction of gun ownership as an answer to violent crime.

Introduction

“The United States Supreme Court has ruled that gun ownership is a fundamental right of the citizens of the United States. Some citizens feel that they can now own any weapon that they want. There are still certain guns that are illegal for the average citizen to own these are weapons that are regulated to the military and some law enforcement.

Arguments

There are Federal rules that must be observed and met prior to a person obtaining a gun. These are safety rules and rules that are meant to keep guns away from children and convicted felons as well as other irresponsible people who could possibly injure or kill another person. All legitimate gun owners understand that guns kill and there should be some form of gun control in order to prevent accidents from happening. Accidents are not the only reason for supporting gun control. Another reason is to prevent criminal's? felons? the mentally ill? as well as abusers of wives or husbands from having access to weapons that can be used to intimidate or injure another person. Better law enforcement of the current gun laws should be used by the law enforcement agencies. If better law enforcement of current gun laws were done then that would show that law abiding people do not need to feel that they need guns for self-protection. Extreme gun laws as well as gun confiscation are not the answer to the gun problems facing us Better enforcement of present laws are.

On June 28? 2010? The United States Supreme Court handed down a decision by a vote of 5 to 4 that affirmed gun ownership as a fundamental right of the American people. Prior to this decision? the cities and states felt that it was their rights and responsibility to be able to control who or what kind of guns the people could own. As in many instances? the states only read part of the Constitution? and that part was the part that would give them control over the people. This interpretation by the states had been used for decades. When questioned about the Second Amendment the states would point out that the amendment reads for the establishment of a well-regulated Militia. In addition? since each state has a National Guard state militias are no longer necessary. So home gun ownership is no longer necessary. Of course? there are questions about that and the nine wise judges on the Supreme Court were finely able to set the record straight about that right. (U. S. Supreme Court 2010).

A new ordinance has been drafted in Chicago Ill. to pass new gun restrictions that they feel are in compliance with the Supreme Court's ruling. City leaders say that the new ordinance is necessary in order to prevent gun violence from breaking out in the city of ...