Gun rights

Well not guns are good, but people ought to own a gun. Or they should at least have the right to get one, if you know what I mean. This applies to america and other countries I would like to add if I have a foot note that = some if not all of that was from the source, so give credit (or some of it) to that site. Just to avoid plagiarism issues. C1: US Constitution (only applies to america) Is the amendment one that was created to ensure the continuation and flourishing of the state militias as a means of defense, or was it created to ensure an individual's right to own a firearm? Despite the rhetoric on both sides of the issue, the answer to both questions is most likely, "Yes." The attitude of Americans toward the military was much different in the 1790's than it is today. {1} The Second Amendment (Amendment II) to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights. {2} However, the Supreme Court has now definitively held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that weapon for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Moreover, this right applies not just to the federal government, but to states and municipalities as well. {3} C2: More guns less crime. The federal "assault weapon" ban, upon which gun control supporters claimed public safety hinged, expired in 2004 and the murder rate has since dropped 10 percent. {4} This says once the assault rifle ban expired, murder has dropped. Now this is just tone of many studies, this is an interesting correlation. In my opinion a lot of evidence to my case, however I will provide a few more studies and or facts, just to make this "secure". However, on Monday the FBI released crime statistics that should cause the applauding anti-gunners to sit on their hands. The statistics indicate that between 2008 and 2009, as gun sales soared, the number of murders in our country decreased 7.2 percent. {5} I find this interesting too as different FBI stats show another correlation, when guns sales rise crime (usually) drop. Now why is this? My theory also many others is that if people are armed they won't commit the crime as it is possible you can fight back. I will provide a another study, then next contention: More than a decade later, it continues to play a key role in ongoing arguments over gun-control laws: despite all the attacks by gun-control advocates, no one has ever been able to refute Lottï¿½€™s simple, startling conclusion that more guns mean less crime. {6} By the way it's a good read. I used to be skeptical until this very throughout in depth analysis. So even if you disagree with I said above, just read it. Just a suggestion. C3: Why people use guns I know you will pull out the "hey gun owners will kill people", so why do they own a gun? Here is a gallup poll: Protection against crime like 64% Target shooting 71% Hunting 64% go to my source for more info. Yes you can choose mutiple answers. That's why it = more then 100%. So overall the reasons are practical. It is a sport to own a gun. C4: Gun accidents are rare. Actually fatal gun incidents are quite rare, they seem common as these incidents are rare, no one cares if you fall: In Targeting Guns, Dr. Kleck concludes in part, "Most gun accidents occur in the home, many (perhaps most) of them involving guns kept for defense. However, very few accidents occur in connection with actual defensive uses of guns. Gun accidents are generally committed by unusually reckless people with records of heavy drinking, repeated involvement in automobile crashes, many traffic citations, and prior arrests for assault. Gun accidents, then, involve a rare and atypical subset of the population, as both shooters and victims. They rarely involve children, and most commonly involve adolescents and young adults." {8} Total accidents a year are 600. Automobile? 43,000. So you will probably use this argument, but the thing, if this is a reason to ban guns then it should be a bigger reason ban cars. SP you might say "people die accidentally" I will say "people die in cars. SO if that is your reason lets ban cars" That argument doesn't logically work. As rare as fatal gun accidents are among young children, their actual frequency is probably overstated. Florida State University criminologist Dr. Gary Kleck suggests that some fatal gun accidents may actually be the culmination of a history of child abuse, in other words intentional homicides. {8} So now you will try to point out it said it was suicidal, so banning guns would lower the incidents of gun suicides. Well yes gun suicides would fall, suicides would remain. The Kid could try to overdose on medicine, stab himself, steal his parents car keys and drive off a bridge, he could still do suicide if he wanted to regardless. C5: Keen saw Georgia This goes with the more guns less crime. In 1982, the Kennesaw City Council unanimously passed a law requiring heads of households to own at least one firearm with ammunition. {9} In fact, according to Stephenson, it caused the crime rate in the city to plunge. Kennesaw Historical Society president Robert Jones said following the law's passage, the crime rate dropped 89 percent in the city, compared to the modest 10 percent drop statewide. "It did drop after it was passed," he said. "After it initially dropped, it has stayed at the same low level for the past 16 years." {9} So forcing guns upon people here dropped crime. A huge benefit. C6: benefits of firearms Dr. Suter writes: "The true measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives and medical costs saved, the injuries prevented, and the property protected ï¿½€" not the burglar or rapist body count. Since only 0.1 - 0.2 percent of defensive uses of guns involve the death of the criminal, any study, such as this, that counts criminal deaths as the only measure of the protective benefits of guns will expectedly underestimate the benefits of firearms by a factor of 500 to 1,000." [10] SO basically allowing allowing guns reduces accidents and crime. C8: economic benefits of gins Well it helps ILLEGAL markets: If the government strictly regulates legal gun production, then production will simply continue illegally in the black market. {11} However, in the black market the risks of producing are much higher. Getting arrested, fined, having property confiscated, or going to jail are all risks of engaging in illegal gun production. This increased risk will cause the supply of guns to fall and the price to rise. {11} So basically controlling them wouldn't solve the problem. Here are the predicted downfalls of the california gun laws: The NSSF estimates that the three bills would cost California $35.7 million in lost retail sales. {12} So it would hurt the economy as a whole legal industry would die. No space for conclusion. PS: it deleted my sources, so they may be outa order. sources: http://www.usconstitution.net... {1} http://en.wikipedia.org... {1} http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com... {3} http://www.nraila.org... {4} http://www.nraila.org... {5} http://press.uchicago.edu... {6} http://www.gallup.com... {7} http://www.guncite.com... {8} http://www.rense.com... {9} http://archive.newsmax.com... {10} http://libertariananarchy.com... {11} http://www.personalliberty.com... {12}