Second Amendment

The second amendment states...
      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.


What it means to me...
      Basically, this amendment means that people have the right to own a gun and keep it in their possession. This right to bear arms is very controversial and has caused quite a stir in politics, as well as society in general. People are either 100% for it or 100% against it. Many say that the amendment protects only the right to have state militias-today's National Guard-while others point to it as guaranteeing individuals the right to keep arms for their own self-defense. Personally, I think that people should not have the freedom of owning a gun because many who have one don't use it for the right reasons. Without guns, crime would go down dramatically. People who are for it argue that people have the right to protect themselves. But if nobody had a gun, then nobody would have to protect themselves from others with guns. People should not have to resort to using guns on others to get their points across. It's like taking the easy way out.


The following is an article about gun control...
______________________________________________________________
Law Would Shield Gun Makers from Lawsuits
Could not be sued for illegal actions of gun owners
By Robert Longley

A bill sponsored by NRA board member and U.S. Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho), would effectively ban lawsuits against gun manufacturers when their products are used in the commission of crimes.

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (S.397), would prohibit civil lawsuits from being filed against manufacturers or sellers of firearms, ammunition, or components of a firearm for damages resulting from the "criminal or unlawful misuse of a firearm." Lawsuits would still be allowed in cases:

  where firearms are transferred with the knowledge that they will be used in the commission of a crime of violence or drug trafficking,

  where federal or state laws were violated in the transfer of the firearms,

  cases of breach of contract or warranty in connection with the purchase of the firearm, or

  cases of death, physical injuries, or property damage resulting directly from a defect in design or manufacture of the firearm when used as intended or in a reasonably foreseeable manner.

The Protection of Lawful Commerce has garnered 56 additional co-sponsors in the Senate, including some key democrats. The bill has passed the House in the two previous sessions of Congress and is expected to do so again this session.

Republican Senators actually killed the bill in the last session, after pro gun control Senators attached amendments to it, including an extension of the now defunct ban on assault rifles and the closing of the gun show loophole.

The bill is supported by the NRA and the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade lobby representing gun makers.

Opponents fear the bill would both immunize the gun industry against negligence-based lawsuits and prevent the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives from acting against so-called "rouge" gun dealers.

The bill is intended to address a growing number of active and pending lawsuits brought by individuals and cities against gun makers whose products were used in the commission of violent crimes.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/guncontrol/a/gunmakerbill.htm

____________________________________________________________
This article basically states that the National Rifle Assoc. (NRA) sponsored a bill back in 2005 which would eliminate lawsuits filed against gun manufacturers after their products were used in a criminal act. If an individual misuses a firearm, or other type of ammunition, then no lawsuit can be made to the gun manufacturers or sellers. However, there are still some exceptions for example: if the gun is sold knowing it would be used in a criminal act, if the gun is sold illegally or without proper permits, or if death or property damage occurs due to a defect in the design of the firearm. If any of these occur, then a lawsuit may be filed against the manufacturer or distributor. This lawsuit will help to reduce the number of lawsuits filed from individuals and cities just because the gun was used in a crime. Its not the manufacturer's fault that their product got put into the wrong hands.   


The following are two political cartoons about the right to bear arms...

This political cartoon illustrates why there is such a controversial view on this amendment. Some think that guns are more negative than positive, while others believe guns are a necessity to our society. You always hear the saying, 'Guns don't kill people-people kill people.' Just because guns often fall into the wrong hands, that doesn't mean all guns result in a crime or act of violence.

This cartoon illustrates the same idea, that 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people.' Members of the National Rifle Assoc. (NRA) are often people who think that guns are very positive. But those who think guns are negative view the members of the NRA as "lunatics with a gun" and that because people have guns, they kill people. Without guns, they would not have done anything wrong.