Gun control

Okay, I will begin the second round with providing the reason why the 2nd amendment was enacted. Beginning with the Constitution and the primary reason as to why the 2nd amendment was enacted. 1) The second amendment was enacted as a right for all American citizens to protect themselves from future government leaders who could potentially oppress them by using military or government assets to control the American population. The Nazis did gun control to there citizens before taking control of all of Germany with minimal resistance. The founding fathers had common sense and enacted this basic right to own firearms to protect your safety from an unknown future of government leaders that could assume office and pose as a hazard to civil American Life. 2) Although government oppression is unrealistic for America as of right now, The 2nd amendment gives you the most fundamental and basic entitlement a human can possibly have. The right to competently and efficiently protect yourself and your loved ones with minimal resistance as to how you choose to do so. 3) I'll restate as I had stated before that intimidation on criminals (criminals rational fear of being killed by a firearm in the act of a crime) is the best deterrent to crime rationally. When firearms are granted to populations of individuals, With minimal restrictions as to how a person can use those firearms, Crime rates overall are lower as criminals fear of being killed becomes more and more rational. [1]https://www. Cato. Org/publications/commentary/challenging-dc-gun-ban 4) "If you do agree then my point is proven, And if you don't then you are openly supporting school shootings and the average 96 deaths from guns in the US EVERY DAY". If somebody disagrees with your belief system, That definitely does not mean that they support the negative outcome of there belief system. It simply means that they believe there belief justifies the end result. When it comes to gun control or bans, In America, Historically extensive gun regulations have resulted in there being more crime such as in Washington D. C. [1]. Statistics can and are often flawed to promote political gain for political parties. In other words, Even though statistics can be made to accommodate your beliefs, They are often manipulated and the end result is simply a false statistic or lie. Common sense should then replace false statistics. Common sense would tell you that if an individual is afraid to break into a house due to the reality of being killed, That individual is less likely to enter that house. [2]https://www. Google. Com/amp/s/www. Forbes. Com/sites/kalevleetaru/2017/02/02/lies-damned-lies-and-statistics-how-bad-statistics-are-feeding-fake-news/amp/ So overall the thought process that taking away guns and regulating guns saves lives though at first seems ideal and is well intentioned, The result is there being more violence and death in America. This means more than the average number of 96 people a day. Keep in mind that there are over 300 million people living America and that only 96 people being killed by guns a day is not an epidemic by any rational means. 5) "As for the women and children thing, There is no link that leads to the internal link that means more women and children will be harmed, And thus your point has no impact. " Okay, Again let's use common sense and point out that woman and children would be victims of violent crime as murder rates would increase. I would even dare to say that woman and children would be victized even more by criminals as criminals know it is easier to victimize unarmed woman and children than it is unarmed full grown men. Thus the result being violence on woman and children skyrocketing. 6) Now I will address a criminals ability to obtain firearms. A criminals ability will not be heavily impacted as guns are made more difficult to obtain. It may even become easier for criminals to obtain guns as gun dealers could become a very main stream illegal business if criminals or even law abiding citizens turn to illegal activity for being unable to purchase a gun at a store. Believe it or not there already are regulations for buying and maintaining gun ownership. Just like drugs trafficking, Even though drugs are illegal, People still get them. Not to mention that it's not easy to make drugs at home without there being reasonable suspicion from others. People already make guns out of everyday materials found in America, And even though it is illegal, It doesn't stop them. 7) For my final argument for round two, I am going to address some geographical and socioeconomic differences in countries and why just because a policy in one country works does not mean it will work in other countries. America has by far the highest gun ownership rate in the world. America also has the largest and most effective organized crime gangs in the world. Regulating or taking away certain guns from American citizens would open up a new business for organized crime groups further increasing gang violence as gangs compete for business, Resulting in even more death and violence. Even simple regulations such as "being unable to keep your own firearm loaded while on your own property" though innocent and we'll intentioned at first (yet highly controlling) could very possibly lead to people losing there firearm privileges and searching out illegal methods to obtain firearms for protection. Why should the government have a right to tell you how you can protect your own self or your loved ones. In conclusion, For the rationale stated above, I cannot endorse or support this idea that limiting law abiding citizens ability to obtain guns would save lives. Gun violence is by no means an epidemic in America, And taking away citizens rights to competently protect themselves isn't just counterproductive, It's unethical and wrong. [1]https://www. Cato. Org/publications/commentary/challenging-dc-gun-ban [2]https://www. Google. Com/amp/s/www. Forbes. Com/sites/kalevleetaru/2017/02/02/lies-damned-lies-and-statistics-how-bad-statistics-are-feeding-fake-news/amp/