Summary-As of today, October first, our nation has been struck with what appears to be just the most recent in a chain of similar tragedies. Today, at an oreogn community college, a troubled man managed to kill 10 innocent people and wound many others, reportedly due to somewhat anti-religious motives. This has once again reignited the ongoing debate over gun control. While some react to these recent shootings over the last few years as a sign of the need for stricter gun control, others consider it a mental health issue. The article I linked gives the perspectives of many gun-control advocates, and what they would do to curb gun violence. Persomally, I think one of the best ideas proposed was to make the gun liscnense test more rigourous, like a driving test. However, this entire gun issue can be traced back to our current studies on the constitution and our given rights.
Questions-Do you think increased gun control is unconstitutional and/or stripping us of our freedoms? What changes would you personally implement to the firearm system in America? Or do you think tragedies like these are an issue of mental health?
Wow. I looked at your link & it seems that everyone was in some way critical of the gun lobby. Where was the NRA perspective? Even a conservative (the woman who asked about what lawmakers know about God difference between automatic & semi-automatic) was a little guarded about explicitly advocating more guns.
ReplyDeletePersonally I believe that more guns equals a safer country. Not only will it make the United States safer, but by restricting mentally stable people from purchasing guns is stripping them from their constitutional right to bear arms. Countries in Europe that have stricter gun laws have higher crime rates and countries with less strict gun laws have lower crime rates. Why isn't that possible in America? Do you think the shooter in Oregon would have went into the classroom knowing that the teacher and potentially students would be bearing arms? Not only will it make our country safer, but it is a constitutional right
ReplyDeleteI believe the constitution is a living document and should change to reflect the times, this isn't 1776. Guns can now be fully automatic and are capable of killing a large amount of people relatively easily. The constitution protects our right to bear arms for our own protection, in no way is an automatic intended for self-defense. Controlling these kinds of firearms help to prevent tragedies like these from occurring. Extensive background checks should be in place before purchasing any kind of firearm and fully automatics should not be sold at all in the United States.
ReplyDeleteI believe that guns are regulated more heavily in some states compared to others. Carol Costello believes that license tests and background checks should be essential when purchasing a gun. This is required for gun shops, but in some cases, back ground checks are unnecessary. Regulating and controlling guns is very difficult especially with a lot of illegal activities including the cartels. It is important to regulate guns, but too much regulation will take away our right to bear arms.
ReplyDeleteI believe that guns are regulated more heavily in some states compared to others. Carol Costello believes that license tests and background checks should be essential when purchasing a gun. This is required for gun shops, but in some cases, back ground checks are unnecessary. Regulating and controlling guns is very difficult especially with a lot of illegal activities including the cartels. It is important to regulate guns, but too much regulation will take away our right to bear arms.
ReplyDeleteThe question of whether increased gun control is unconstitutional or not is a difficult one to answer. In the it's purest form, it is infringing our constitutional rights, but that's not to say that I'm against gun control. The argument that it will infringe upon our constitutional rights is the one argument that any supporter of the second amendment will make when their rights are in question. If I had it my way, I would want to have the right to bear arms completely removed. Second Amendment rights were different in the late 18th century when most of the country was uninhabited and filled with vicious wildlife and blood thirsty natives. Owning weapons should be unnecessary in 2015, but isn't because the right to bear arms means that students can't go to school everyday without ruling out the possibility that they could be shot at any given point in the day. However, stripping weapons from the American people is an impossible task, because we're stubborn and we'll argue that we need to protect ourselves from gunmen who obtained similar weapons on the same grounds as those who want to be protected. These tragedies are mental health issues that are enabled by the accessibility of firearms.
ReplyDeleteThe question of control has been going on for a very long time and there seems to be no end in sight. We can look to other countries like the United Kingdom and Australia, two countries that have very strict gun control policies and have seen a decreased number of gun violence. While i think that taking away all of our guns will be stripping us of our rights but i believe that gun control would be the right thing to do. Most Americans think that gun control means that every gun will be taken away from us and that is absurd. More through background checks should be mandatory and mental exams should be required as well. These tragedies will take time to heal and we need to step toward in the right direction.
ReplyDeleteGun control is a horrible problem in America. I know that we are all about freedom and making sure the second amendment is held, but this is just extreme. In my opinion we ned a better form of gun control. The most practical answer like Nate and Carol Costello said is to make a tests like the Drivers test, that limits the sale. But all makes the process longer and more complicated to complete. I also feel there should be a large tax on them as well. If it was more difficult to get them that would be far better. However the problem in many cases is not even the control, it is the amount of guns. There is more guns in America than Americans. That is a problem. In every other country it is far lower, but in America everyone needs a gun right.That is ridicoulus. We should try to aim to decrease the amount of weaponry in America. Not even have this many guns for sale. We should try to achieve were 1 gun for one american. 1 gun for every 10 americans like Britian. Although this should happen, it will not because like Zelizer said the NRA is too big and it is in the constitution. The NRa has so much power and so much ability to argue there way out of any accusations, and there is nothing American can do. They say it is mental illness, THEN WHY ARE MENTALLY ILL INDIVIDUALS OWNING GUNS. THAT IS A PROBLEM. Gun control is bad, and it should be a bigger problem it needs to be limited.
ReplyDeleteIncreased gun control is in no way unconstitutional. The second amendment is outdated and pertained to a much different time. I believe that the process in attaining a gun should become much more thorough. We shouldn't solely blame the mentally ill that are partaking in these mass shootings, but those who put guns in there unstable hands. I think that in order to be licensed a gun in America all individuals would have to go through a psychiatric review, have credible people speak on their behalf, and lastly have a solid reason for why they need to own a gun.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that gun control is unconstitutional at all. When the Supreme Court decided it was, they determined that it was in our founding father's vision that all Americans should be able to own a gun. If we are to follow the Supreme Court's strict interpretation of their vision, why are we ignoring the definition of "arms" they used? In the late 18th century, all they had were muskets which could only fire one shot, took 30sec-1min to reload and had an effective range of about 100 meters maximum. They didn't have assault rifles capable of firing multiple rounds a second. If I were to change gun control laws, I would actually try to keep it inline with the founding father's time. I would keep it just as easy to buy sporting rifles and the like as it is today, but make it much harder to own handguns and assault rifles. If you wanted a handgun, you would have to prove you needed it, i.e. live in a dangerous area, unable to defend yourself, prove you're responsible, etc. Assault rifles would only be legal if they were kept at shooting ranges; no private ownership. Guns today in our world are for the most part, simply unnecessary.
ReplyDeleteOf course mass shootings are also in part a mental health issue. Like James Garbarino says in the article, most of these shooters are young males who grew up in bad environments and were left scarred. It would be great if it we could help these people, but lets be honest: these aren't the kinds of people that are going to seek help, and it would be impossible to try and detect possible mass murderers. Gun control is a much more feasible plan.
Personally, I believe increased gun control is not unconstitutional because the Constitution should be interpreted to fit the time. Although the Second Amendment gives people the right to bear arms, it was made to fit a certain era and situation. I think in today's society there needs to be a more strict and rigorous test people must pass in order to receive a license for a gun. Even though, there are some connection between mental health and shootings, not all mentally unstable people are violent or will act out violently.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I believe increased gun control is not unconstitutional because the Constitution should be interpreted to fit the time. Although the Second Amendment gives people the right to bear arms, it was made to fit a certain era and situation. I think in today's society there needs to be a more strict and rigorous test people must pass in order to receive a license for a gun. Even though, there are some connection between mental health and shootings, not all mentally unstable people are violent or will act out violently.
ReplyDeleteI too believe that increased gun control is not unconstitutional because even as the 2nd amendment states it is our right to bear arms this doesn't mean we should hand out guns freely without any precautionary measures. In order to fix this issue, gun buyers should have to take a rigorous test checking their mental health, their gun safety, and have a distinct reason as to why they need to own a gun.However, there is a gray area when saying these tragedies are an issue of mental health because not all mentally disabled people will become violent. The focus should be on the people responsible for distributing guns making sure that no gun is given to someone that may take a turn to violence.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I believe increased gun control, within reason, is not unconstitutional. The second amendment to the constitution can be read one of two ways; that the militia may have guns, or that individuals have guns. It does not state that individuals should have gun, merely that they can. I believe that in a sense, stricter gun control would be slightly reducing our freedoms, but not limiting them. It is only to keep us safe from ourselves and others. Personally, changes I would implement would require a back ground check, prior knowledge of the firearm being purchased (i.e the person knows how to handle it), as well as a mental evaluation. I do believe that these unfortunate events are a result, at least largely, from mental instability, and could have been prevented if this was known.
ReplyDeleteI do not think increased gun control is unconstitutional. I think the second amendment needs to be interpreted in today's times. I think gun buyers should go through background checks and mental health tests before buying guns. Due to recent mass shootings and increased gun violence, it is clear that gun regulation needs to be changed. Although mental health sometimes plays a role in gun violence in shooting, I think there needs to be more overall government control over the use of guns.
ReplyDeleteI believe that an increase in gun control would not be stripping us of our freedoms. If I was able to change the firearm system in America, I would make sure that there was a higher level of requirements that would have to be met for one to purchase a firearm. The increasing number of shootings in this country is frightening and there should be something done so that innocent lives can be saved.
ReplyDeleteI believe that gun control is not unconstitutional. Even though the second amendment states that we have the freedom to bare arms, there should be limitations to that freedom. Obviously guns are making there way into the hands of those who shouldn't have them. I think that we should have thorough background checks, on peoples criminal and mental history. Ignoring the issue won't do anything but make the situation get worse, so it's important to take action now.
ReplyDeleteIn the constitution, people are given the right to bear arms, but with the recent dangers regarding guns, restricting the use of guns is not unconstitutional. Doing so would save lives and make for a better country. I think that having stricter tests would be beneficial, but wouldn't stop gun violence altogether. I believe the government does need to get more involved and restrictions need to be set.
ReplyDeleteThe constitution gives the right to free speech, yet things such as fighting words that have the sole purpose of harm can be limited. If such is acceptable it seems only reasonable to limit guns to minimize the sole use of them for harm. While many of these school shootings likely are mental health issues, they are only enabled by guns, which is an issue. I believe guns should strictly regulated. Devices could even be required that act like ankle bracelets when one is on house arrest. When guns come within 50 feet of school the police are instantly notified. If they are tampered with the police are notified.
ReplyDeleteI do not think gun control is unconstitutional, because illegal weapons could be a threaten to our community. I think first is there should be no people with mental issue own a gun because this will put people around he or she safety threatened. Also , there should be no use of weapon unless it is a life threatened situation. The right to own a gun is for citizens to protect themselves, not for harming other citizens. The problem that cause the disaster is not the mental issue, it is the problem of putting a weapon to a men with unstable thoughts that will harm society. Even this will violate people's rights of arming self, there should be system that monitor the gun owners' mental health to prevent more gun shot.
ReplyDeleteI don't believe gun control is unconstitutional because its a issue that america is facing right now where there are to many deaths caused from shooting. Gun control should be constitutional because citizens are getting hurt from others that aren't stable and think that guns are ok to shoot. Its not a problem of whether it takes freedom away but the lives its killing. Although the people that are shooting might have a mental illness its also the way they got the gun.
ReplyDeleteRecently, gun control has been a serious topic of discussion for states and national legislatures. Agreeing with Eric statement, I believe that issue with gun control is that it sets restrictions on our given rights and is contradicting the foundation of morals and believes our country is set upon: protecting the right of individuals. I would personally implement classes, mandatory in high schools, that would educate about the proper and safe ways of dealing with firearms. Also, we should have more programs for people who have mental health disabilities instead of wasting the money on restrictions.
ReplyDelete