You are on page 1of 9

Jack Gilmore

English 102

Research Argument Revision

5/8/17

Second Amendment Revised

On September 25th, 1789, the Bill of Rights was written, since then many amendments

have been ratified to adjust with the times. The abolishment of slavery as well as womens rights

to vote are both examples of productive change in the United States. However, in modern day

America the second amendment has become more detrimental than beneficial, and it needs to be

repealed. The second amendment states: 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. Since the

birth of this nation the Bill of Rights has been a topic of controversy; in recent years, the second

amendment has made headlines regarding acts of terrorism, mass murders, and unfortunately

school shootings. It is because of these reasons that the availability of guns needs to be

eliminated to provide a safer world for our children.

To begin, the right to bear arms can be interpreted as guns, or weapons in general; in this

case firearms are the more prominent issue. Back in the 1930s carrying a gun in public was

common, and it was almost always done openly; todays society is the complete opposite in

approach (Pickert, 2014). Firearms can be separated into a variety of categories however, in the

United States most of the weapons used are assault rifles, pistols, and submachine guns; which

all fall into the group of small arms. The accessibility of purchasing a firearm is frightening,

quite simply for the fact that several gun sellers do not require a background check. This

convenience may portray a positive light for selling guns to family or friends but, ultimately
there is always a risk that a gun could fall into the hands of someone with malevolent intent. One

example for this is the various gangs spread between both coasts, luring young members to

commit atrocities such as murder.

A person could imagine the look displayed by the founding fathers if they saw what their

country had become. The second amendment was devised to ensure the protection of the

American people, today that same design is killing them. The technology of guns, cannons, and

rockets have evolved all throughout the history of the United States for military reasons. During

a state of war, when the enemy has superior fire power, the military responds by increasing the

number of weapons to gain a tactical advantage. As the world becomes increasingly more

technologically advanced, so does guns and their lethalness. Guns have led to the deaths of

children shooting their playmates, road rage shootings, and those caught in the cross fire;

repealing the second amendment would ensure none of these horrific events could occur.

There has been much controversy over the abolishment of the second amendment, each

voice expressing their opinion on the matter. One of which is a professor of law, James Lindgren

at Northwestern University who wrote an article, Forward: The past and Future of Guns, for the

Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology. Lindgren argues that, On historical issues, I agree

with the gun rights crowd that in the Second Amendment the Framers recognized an individual

right to own guns. On policy issues, however, I tend to believe that some forms of gun control

probably save more lives than they cost, but unfortunately the net effects are probably not that

large one way or the other. As a professor of law, keeping in mind the countless hours dedicated

to his profession, Lindgren does make a valid point that some forms of gun control could save

more lives (Lindgren, 2015). Lindgren supports his view by adding the 2004 National

Academies National Research Councils data, There is no credible evidence that right-to-
carry laws either decrease or increase violent crime; research has found associations between

gun availability and suicide with guns, but it does not show whether such associations reveal

genuine patterns of cause and effect. To acquire a better view of the situation, In 2012, there

were 500 murders in Chicago, more than New York City (419) or Los Angeles (299), In Illinois,

86% of homicides were with guns, the highest percentage in the nation; in the United States

overall, 69% homicides involved guns. (Lindgren, 2015). These deaths could have been

prevented if the ability to purchase guns did not exist.

In Lindgrens article, he tackled the issue with a dualistic view on how guns

affect modern America, many do not share his same beliefs. In fact, many Americans are on the

willing to make guns safer. The American Journal of Public Health (AJPH) conducted a two

part survey, the US Publics Preference for Safer Guns, with Julia Wolfson at the helm. Julia

Wolfson, an assistant professor for nutritional sciences concluded, Overall, we found that 59%

of Americans, if they were to purchase a new handgun, were willing to buy a childproof gun,

23% were undecided, and 18% were unwilling to buy a child- proof gun thats more than half of

America (Wolfson, 2016). This data proves that majority of Americans are still willing to

purchase guns, and just because an idea is followed by many, that does not mean it is the correct

choice. During the second survey the AJPH found, Among gun owning Americans, 43% were

willing to purchase a childproof gun and 33% were undecided. Almost two thirds of nongun-

owning Americans (65% of those with guns in their households, and 63% of those in nongun

households) expressed willing- ness to purchase childproof guns. Interest in childproof guns was

highest among politically liberal Americans (71%), but was also high among political moderates

(56%) and conservatives (56%). People with children younger than 18 years at home were more

interested in purchasing childproof guns than those without children at home (65% versus 56%)
(Wolfson, 2016). As shown above, many liberals wish that guns were childproofed, whereas

moderates and conservatives were not as willing, leaving themselves on the fence.

Since the 2017 election, instead of reforming the second amendment some desire that the

country make a national concealed carry law. John Boch, a co-chair of President Trump Second

Amendment Coalition states during an interview with National Public Radio (NPR), As it is

currently in America, there's a patchwork of laws across the land and you have to do a lot of

research ahead of time to make sure that you're legal if you're carrying your concealed firearm

across state lines. If we had national reciprocity, our concealed carry licenses would be

recognized with full faith and credit just as our driver's licenses are to current Americas. And so,

we want to see that expanded to the concealed carry licenses as well across the nation so I can go

to New York City or to Los Angeles and not have to do a mountain of research and maybe find

out that my carry license is not recognized in one state versus another (Under, 2017). A national

concealed carry law could have dire consequences. For instance, between the years 2006 and

2007 a total of 25,423 firearm homicides and 34,235 firearm suicides happened among US

residents, among those suicides were youths aged 10-19 years (Kegler, 2011). Those such as

Boch may argue that defense is the only reason for having a concealed weapon. Once again, if

there are no guns in the US, then defending oneself with a gun against a gunman would no

longer be an issue.

The largest issue by far with the second amendment regarding guns in American culture

is school shootings. School shootings have become an annual situation in the United States.

There are many who believe the answer is arming the teachers to defend the students if a gunman

makes it onto campus. Allen Rostron, wrote an article, School Shootings and the Legislative

Push to Arm Teachers, on the second amendment within the school setting. Inside the article a
multitude of infamous school shootings were mentioned such as in 1999 at Columbine High

School 12 students and a teacher were killed, in 2007 at Virginia Tech five faculty members and

27 students were murdered, and most upsetting in 2012 at Sandy Hook Elementary School 20

first graders and six adults were killed (Rostron, 2014). Each death was a person who had a

future whose life was cut short.

These shootings have developed attention in the media, causing people to deliberate if

arming teachers may be a safe choice. The National Rifle Association (NRA) proposed that every

school should be guarded by armed officers. The NRA put the Honorable Congressman Asa

Hutchinson to lead the effort, whether theyre retired police, retired military or rescue

personnel, I think there are people in every community in this country, who would be happy to

serve, if only someone asked them and gave them the training and certification to do so (Rostron,

2014). The NRAs proposal demonstrates their inability respond properly to violence, violence

cannot be solved with more violence. One of the consequences would be the death of a student, a

parent, or even the faculty if they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, ultimately getting

caught in the crossfire.

The safety of students in schools should be one of the top priorities in the US yet its not,

and weapons still make it onto school grounds. The children have a somber view; they are

frightened during school hours; armed officers will only increase that fear. Feeling unsafe can

cause stress which increases a childs production of the stress hormone, cortisol. Long lasting

effects can occur from prolonged stress. some that are associated with mood disorders like major

depressive disorder, or anxiety disorders. In response to this Carol Riordan, wrote Making

School Safe, an article for Techniques: Connecting Education & Careers, in which she addressed

the environments children are in these days. She incorporated the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDCP) national survey on what children perceive while enrolled in class

between the grades nine through 12, Twelve percent reported being in a physical fight on school

property in the year prior to the survey. Nearly 6 percent reported they did not go to school on

one or more days in the month before the survey because they felt unsafe at school or on their

way to and from school (Riordan, 2014). The second amendment could negatively impact

children to a further degree if a national conceal carry law comes to fruition; making that 6

percent a fond memory. Among those in the national survey 5 percent of children enrolled at

school reported they carried a weapon, this is the problem at hand. If a child can get ahold of a

gun, then the second amendment must be repealed.

Schools are not the only places affected, there has been shootings across America

stemming from terroristic motivation, mental illness, and mass murder. In Aurora Colorado in

July of 2012, there was a shooting inside of a movie theater causing Americans, and even the

president himself to ponder if the second amendment was doing more harm than good. President

Obama mentioned in a statement, But we Americans are not inherently a more violent people

than folks are in other countries. Were not inherently prone to mental health problems. The main

difference that sets our nation apart, what makes us so susceptible to so many mass shootings is

that we dont do enough, we dont take the basic common sense actions to keep guns out of the

hands of criminals and dangerous people. Whats different about America is its easy to get your

hands on a gun (Keehn, 2015). Obama would continue to voice his pro-gun control until the end

of his two terms as President.

On the flip side, instead of abolishing the second amendment, national concealed carry

could become legal, the NRA as well as gun right advocates would have completed their desire,

and may or may not stop advocating. Gangs would use the law for their own motives, murderers
would become systematic in their ability to kill. The days of school shootings would become a

lighter memory compared to the bloodshed that would occur the days following the legalization.

Children would be hidden away by their parents in order to keep them safe, truly a dystopian

society.

There are many different solutions the United States can use to answer problem, doing

nothing, making national concealed carry legal, taking away the second amendment right

entirely, and reform the amendment to regulate the availability of firearms. These are four

different major options and each come at a different price. By repealing the second amendment

the country would have a chance to work together for a better future, one that the founding

fathers would be proud of. Both gun reformists and gun rights activists would eventually see the

positive outcome of a nation without guns. The nation would become safer, and people will no

longer walk in fear with the thought of being harmed on the streets.

Lastly, the United States is no longer at war with an oppressive country trying to devise a

revolution. Times have changed since then, the reasons to own a gun are no longer, the military

force has enough to keep the US safe from any occupying country or incoming attack. It is

because of these reasons; the second amendment should be repealed to ensure a safer and

brighter world for our children.


Works Cited

Blocher, Joseph and Darrell A. H. Miller. "What Is Gun Control? Direct Burdens, Incidental

Burdens, and the Boundaries of the Second Amendment." University of Chicago Law

Review, vol. 83, no. 1, Winter2016, pp. 295-355. EBSCOhost,

search.ebscohost.com.montgomerycollege.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=bth&AN=114160392&site=eds-live&scope=site.

Keehn, Gabriel and Deron Boyles. "Sense, Nonsense, and Violence: Levinas and the Internal

Logic of School Shootings." Educational Theory, vol. 65, no. 4, Aug. 2015, pp. 441-458.

EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/edth.12126.

Kegler, S. R., Annest, J. L., Kresnow, M., & Mercy, J. A. (2011). Violence-related firearm deaths

among residents of metropolitan areas and cities--United States, 2006-2007. Morbidity

and Mortality Weekly Report. p. 573.

Lindgren, James. "Forward: The past and Future of Guns." Journal of Criminal Law &

Criminology, vol. 104, no. 4, Fall2015, p. 705. EBSCOhost,

search.ebscohost.com.montgomerycollege.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=f5h&AN=112464434&site=eds-live&scope=site.

Pickert, Kate. "Armed America." Time, vol. 184, no. 12, 29 Sept. 2014, p. 28. EBSCOhost,

search.ebscohost.com.montgomerycollege.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=ulh&AN=98381900&site=eds-live&scope=site.

Riordan, Carol Ann. "Making School Safe." Techniques: Connecting Education & Careers, vol.

89, no. 7, Oct. 2014, p. 26. EBSCOhost,

search.ebscohost.com.montgomerycollege.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=f5h&AN=98641784&site=eds-live&scope=site.
Rostron, Allen. "School Shootings and the Legislative Push to Arm Teachers." University of

Toledo Law Review, vol. 45, no. 3, Spring2014, pp. 439-455. EBSCOhost,

search.ebscohost.com.montgomerycollege.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=a9h&AN=97359002&site=eds-live&scope=site.

Under Trump, A 2nd Amendment Coalition Looks To Push National Concealed-Carry Law."

Weekend Edition Sunday, 11 Dec. 2016. Literature Resource Center,

montgomerycollege.idm.oclc.org/login?

url=http://go.galegroup.com.montgomerycollege.idm.oclc.org/ps/i.do?

p=LitRC&sw=w&u=rock77357&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE

%7CA473673032&asid=6de36b60de5dce25f7dde63174576b07. Accessed 2 Apr. 2017.

Wolfson, Julia A., et al. "The US Public's Preference for Safer Guns." American Journal of

Public Health, vol. 106, no. 3, Mar. 2016, pp. 411-413. EBSCOhost,

doi:10.2105/AJPH.2015.303041.