The question of the regulation of handguns is 'one of the most divisive social issues in American society' because 'firearms in general, and handguns in particular, are emblematic of individual autonomy and freedom from government intrusion' . This debate is actually centered on the Second Amendment to the Constitution which protects 'the rights of people to keep and bear arms'. Currently more than 250,000,000 firearms are owned by American individuals with a global population of 300,000,000 people. Thus, this right to keep and bear arms for ones own security seems to be really important in the eyes of the Americans. However, since several years, more Americans are favourable to an increased control concerning the selling of handguns. Moreover, after incidents such as the school-shooting of Littleton (Columbine) on April 1999, which resulted in the deaths of 14 students and a teacher and more recently in a shooting in Los Angeles, many states and cities are becoming aware of the dangers of the free movement of weapons. Nevertheless, we have to underline that, in spite of the guns control tendency, the government has never made strong a decision to increase it significantly.
[...] Moreover the NRA relies on the support of gun manufactures and many groups who have the gun rights. For instance they criticize safety locks for placing an undue burden on gun manufacturers without a proven benefit to the public. Sometimes the NRA doesn't waffle to appeal to the justice to force the government to admit some of its mistake (the case in September 2005 after the event of the Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans). In the mess that was predominant at this moment in the city, the authorities decided to confiscate all the personal weapons. [...]
[...] The debate of carrying of arms in the United State and the role of the NRA (National Rifle Association) The question of the regulation of handguns is “one of the most divisive social issues in American society” because “firearms in general, and handguns in particular, are emblematic of individual autonomy and freedom from government intrusion”[1]. This debate is actually centered on the Second Amendment to the Constitution which protects “the rights of people to keep and bear arms”. Currently more than 250,000,000 firearms are held by American individuals for a global population of 300,000,000 people. [...]
[...] Since its change of leader in 1977, the NRA has really become a strong opponent of “any proposed legislation that purports to limit access to guns by law-abiding citizens”[3] , according to the rights defended by the second amendment. Nevertheless this group argues that the most dangerous aren't the weapons but people who can acquire and use it. That's why they strongly support laws restricting access to guns by criminals and unbalanced people. How can they bear upon the government decisions? [...]
[...] One of the presidents who tried to fight against this power was Bill Clinton. In the aftermath of the school shooting of Columbine, he denounced the fact that the NRA had an important influence among the members of the House of Representatives. He said “the House version of the bill is a watered-down version of the Senate bill.” And he denounced that the Republicans wanted to pass a gun control bill “plainly ghost written” by the NRA.[4] However we can wonder what the Americans think about gun control and if there is no group fighting for gun control. [...]
[...] The most important and influent of these lobbyists is the National Rifle Association. This non profit group has a sizeable influence among the government and also with the Republicans. How did this pro-guns lobby react to these shootings and this shift in the public opinion, and how does the NRA continue to defend the right to bear arms? First of all I would like to present quickly the NRA, to explain how it can influence the action of the government concerning gun laws. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
