How We Should Really Look at the Second Amendment | Teen Ink

How We Should Really Look at the Second Amendment

September 24, 2014
By Ruth-Ann BRONZE, Granbury, Texas
Ruth-Ann BRONZE, Granbury, Texas
1 article 0 photos 0 comments

     What does the second amendment say? It states that "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". The way I interpret this is that when you bear arms, you physically carry a weapon on your person. By saying that this right "shall not be infringed", I think, the framers meant for this to act as a reminder to the government. The reminder is that they shouldn't take this right away from the people.


However, the framer's also had a reality for the people to face; that they must accept the fact that the right to bear arms not a privilege. The framers intended for the citizens under the constitution to realize that the amendment, as with all the amendments, exists as a God given right and remains a responsibility of the people to safeguard. To me the second amendment means that I have the right to protect myself, but it seems that, the right may get taken away from me with the overabundance of gun regulations and gun control laws being passed today. The reason that people fear for their safety and aim to abolish our gun rights is due to the fact that people have not acted responsibly. That much is obvious, but what doesn't stand out is the solution.
     

My issue with gun control surpasses more than just the idea that it will prevent me from protecting myself; the real issue I have with gun control remains with the fact that it doesn't work. If someone really wants a gun or really wants to harm someone, they will find a way, with or without guns. For example, earlier this year, in May, a twelve year old girl got stabbed nineteen times by her friends. Her friends didn't have to use a gun to harm her; all it took was a knife. This literally reinforces the statement that "guns don't kill people, people do".
   

 Humans have so many capabilities, both good and bad, while some may want to create life, others may want to take it away. This brings me to the next issue with gun control. Unfortunately, when it comes to gun restrictions there will always be a specific group of people that want guns and they will find them. Just as Ted Nugent said, "Where you have the most armed citizens in America, you have the lowest violent crime rate. Where you have the worst gun control, you have the highest crime rate". With more gun control regulations, gangs, for example, will still feel the need to protect themselves. So while the law abiding citizens will have no protection they make it just that much easier for the wrong people with weapons to commit a crime and as cases of crimes add up, the crime rate will also soar.
     

When it comes down to it, if people intend to do harm they will find a way to accomplish their goal. Meaning, that gun restrictions do not help anyone. Instead, they're more likely to hurt the people the framers intended to protect. The whole issue with the second amendment is simply that people are not responsible with a weapon. For example, an instructor at a shooting range in Arizona died on August 27 this year, after a 9-year-old girl accidentally shot him in the head. He had good intentions, just wanting to show the girl how to use an Uzi, but it ended badly. I know this may be a rare occurrence, but the instructor acted with no responsibility. This shows that it's not just the criminals that create situations in which our state and government policymakers feel the need to create restrictions on guns. I understand that criminals will never act responsibly with a gun, because that's not their intention, but if we could narrow down these accidents it might show that the majority of the population can handle the duty bestowed upon them by the framers in the second amendment. 
   

 The second amendment ensures that I have the right to carry a weapon to protect myself, for example, if there is a case that demands I take action against someone wishing to do me harm. I understand that this right doesn't mean I can go shoot someone simply because I don't like them, this amendment means that I must uphold the same duty as everyone else; I must act responsibly when I have a weapon in my possession. Yes, there will be people that abuse this God given right, but this amendment means a lot to me because it allows for me to ensure my own safety. 



Similar Articles

JOIN THE DISCUSSION

This article has 2 comments.


Jack Burton said...
on Sep. 30 2014 at 3:25 pm
Bravo Zulu, as we said in the Navy

teebonicus said...
on Sep. 30 2014 at 1:46 pm
Sorry, Ruth Ann. Too logical (and too impregnated with a valid view of American history). [/sarcasm]   Actually, your treatise gives me hope that the communist infiltration of our public school system has not been universally successful.   My compliments! Now, go on out there and CONVINCE your peers never to vote for a progressive as long as they and their grandchildren live, and tell your teachers that if they don't like that, tough.