The recent tightening of gun control in the state of California displayed the effects of such inconsistency. The strictness of the law in California is rendered ineffective compared to its neighboring states with less strict laws.
'Gov. Brown signed this legislation at
a point when national trends favor looser gun laws. Forty-two states allow open
carry, and a law being debated in Congress could make stricter state gun laws
obsolete.'
“Whatever state that
has the least restrictions would be the law of the entire country.”
Evidence shows that when the states allow concealed carry they enjoy a decrease in gun crimes. 42 out of 50 states allow concealed carry and if the rest were to follow suit then gun crimes nationwide would decrease. The second amendment applies to the entire nation and should be upheld consistently across the nation.
True, not every case will yield the same results, and there are those who uphold that tightening the restrictions on firearms will reduce the crime rate. However, in any case the United States of America is a union of states and must continue to live up to it's name and legacy. As much as many states will disagree, we are still one country and especially in something as impacting as guns, we must be one.
While each part of the country has special needs and one must adapt to his/her surroundings, this does not give any government the right to restrict one of the most valuable and effective freedoms that anyone can have. The right to bear arms in defense of one’s family, property, rights, and self is priceless and cannot be infringed.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhile your argument for the right to bear arms is convincing, I do not see any solution provided in your blog post for the increasing murder rates in our country. How are we to prevent another Sandy Hook? Is the solution to simply allow everyone to carry whatever gun they wish with the hopes that people will defend themselves? I understand the importance of the second amendment, and I understand that limiting gun laws have prevented certain crimes in the past, but what can we do to stop the increasingly violent habits of our society?
ReplyDeleteGood questions and a valid point. I do not pretend to know how to solve an issue that is under controversy throughout the world, but I do have some ideas that I believe can help. Based on history, those who commit criminal acts, including tyrants or dictators, attempt to impose their will upon others. I do believe and have seen through research that this becomes more difficult when the average citizen stands up for him or herself. The brief answer to your question is that no, allowing everyone to have any gun they desire will not provide the solution. However, neither will restricting their freedom to carry the weapons they are now free to bear. The freedom will give the citizens an opportunity to defend themselves if needed and will decrease the power of the gun wielding criminals. They will have more fear knowing that the people they attempt to overpower or murder have the capacity of shooting back with just as powerful a weapon and this will deter their capacity to slaughter large numbers of people.
DeleteYou have a valid point about standardization of national gun laws. hodgepodge of mixed up laws, bans, restrictions and other nonsensical mixtures is confusing for anybody, not just the gun owner. For example, moving in between states can be particularly obnoxious when owning guns. In california, for example, so called "black rifles" are prohibited. These include M-16's and AK-47's. While they are banned here, most other states allow them. Upon entering california, these weapons can and have been confiscated. If we could standardize the national law, it would prevent many headaches and other inconveniences and give us some normalcy and a standard by which to solve this problem.
ReplyDeleteVery good point. I would like to have mentioned the California issue in greater detail, because it emphasizes my perspective. The inconsistent state laws can be a cause of confusion and headache as people are treated differently in different parts of the country. There should be greater unity nationwide on this important issue.
DeleteI agree with you that the Second Amendment must be protected and that, although states have their individual constitutions, the US Constitution is meant to apply to and over the states. A standardization of gun laws would be nice; however, States and their judiciaries are open to their own interpretation of the Second Amendment for their individual gun laws, so it would be hard to control. Also, by how much has gun crime decreased in states that have concealed carry laws? I know that concealed carry laws work and I would appreciate some more statistics to prove this.
ReplyDeleteIndeed it would be hard to control, but the fact that states are open to their own interpretation is, in my opinion, a large part of the cause of the problem. The standardization would at least give us unity as a country on the issue. Then people couldn't take advantage of defenseless states using weapons that they may have acquired in states that carry. That's a good point about the statistics, and I planned to use a graph showing the percentages but was unable to upload it yet. I agree that the evidence backing it would be a great improvement. Thanks
Delete