+1 (218) 451-4151 info@writersnest.org

When our fore fathers first came onto this land, they were
oppressed by their rulers.  These wise men decided to stage a revolt
against their government and start up a new government, with a set of rules,
laws and rights.  They did not stage this massive revolt by negotiation, or
arbitration but with blood shed on both sides.  When the revolt was over,
the fore fathers had risen to victory through the use of warfare and guns.
They then decided to make a bill stating the basic rights that every man in
the country could have.  There were ten of these basic rights, among them
were the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the right of
free speech, and most importantly, the right too keep and bear arms in
order to protect their families, gather food, and preserve their rights,
from all threats.  However, in these times of increased violence with guns
and wild over population, is keeping guns available too dangerous to be
continued?  If so, how can we justify taking away one of the most
basic and sacred rights that has been held throughout the ages?  If we do
this, are we any better than our previous rulers who used control as an
excuse for oppression?
The opposition of gun rights say that the amendment states that The
Second Amendment was never intended as a gun license for the entire
American populace. As originally drafted—and as consistently interpreted by
the courts for more than a century—the Amendment does not grant any blanket
right to own a gun nor does it stand in the way of rational, effective gun
control.  They also say that the idea of gun ownership as an American
Birthright is just a myth.  However, this is not true.  The amendment
states that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.  Clearly stated,
this says that the right of people to have and use guns shall not be taken