Do a ban on assault rifles infringe on the second amendment Research Paper

Do a ban on assault rifles infringe on the second amendment - Research Paper Example So many people have died and children have not been spared either. Most of the victims may be lucky to be taken to the hospital, but in most cases, they die immediately. Now that the occurrence of tragedy after tragedy seems to be the new trend, this is now the most appropriate time to discuss the issue of gun use in America, more specifically, among the civilians. The recent ban on assault rifle by the president is encouraging and shows that perhaps things may soon turn out well. However, critics are now stating that the ban is likely to infringe on the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment Stipulates that people should have a right to bear arms which should not be infringed. According to Charles, the Second Amendment is a right that shall not be infringed (8). Charles indicates that most people interpret the statement as one that should not be changed and view it as a right (8). Years ago, in 1940s and 1950s, guns were deemed as a legal way of the elite protecting their families, or in a position to secure themselves from thieves and wanted criminals. However, today people depend on the police and the army for defense, raising the question as to whether people need these guns anymore. Why there should be a Ban on Rifles and other Guns A ban on the rifles would be helpful to the safety agencies when it comes to rooting out all the terror threats that civilians may receive on a domestic level. It would be easier to have the agencies getting this issue under control with the existence of a ban. This is because instead of the agencies worrying about how the assault rifle owners are likely to react or behave, they are likely to put more effort and save time while controlling the issue. In addition, the individual privacy of American would be on the increase as much as their security is likely to increase. Unwarranted searches in people’s homes and gun violence would decrease drastically. Contrary to what most civilians assume, the Second Amendment only app lies to active duty personnel who are in the militia (Alters 46). This therefore means that the proponents who usually argue that banning the assault rifles violates the rights as stipulated in the Second Amendment are wrong. There are also the critics who argue that laws controlling guns are only there as a restriction on the freedom of Americans. There are also those who argue out that such aggressive ban rules are likely to result to an increase of trade in the black market and therefore have a negative impact. These are some of the arguments that most critics present and have little weight on the main goal of maintaining the security of people and saving human lives. All guns, whether rifles or hand guns present clear problems to the society and this outweighs the issue of human freedom or the black market. When the right to life is threatened, the right to freedom can no longer be said to be effective. A person who is threatened with the possibility of crossing paths with a men tally ill person with a gun is likely to lose his or her right to live and therefore will not be in a position to enjoy freedom rights. There are laws that have been enacted over the years to regulate the use of firearms but do not seem to work (Alters 45). It is not shocking to know that assault rifles are involved in homicides as well since in most cases they can fire automatically. If there are laws controlling gun possession, then this means that safety agencies are twice likely to monitor the activity of civilians as compared to if the