The Possession of a Defensive Weapon - Case Study Example

Gun Control Debate Year) With increased threat to life and personal properties, the possession of a defensive weaponbecomes essential. In the United States, gun control issues have been a center of interest and debate by the stakeholders torn in between gun ownership legalization or completely banning guns. This paper in particular explores the scope of an amicable solution to the most controversial issues in American politics. The cause of dispute lies between the autonomy of individuals to own fire arms for self defense and the states responsibility to prevent crime. Gun Control Debate in the civic sphere with regard to gun control can amicably be resolved only through the concern of the government with regard to existing legislature norms. References of many issues prove the promotion of an ammunition culture that nurtures increased crime rates in many parts of the United States. While a leading majority of gun owners are noble possessors, there are cases of abuse of artillery to cause public damage or personal assault. There are incidents at a hike where underage gun users committing crimes. At this juncture, the debate on gun control issues has been a center of significance and the debate is to prove the vigor of gun claimers over the civic supporting a complete ban of personal possession of arms. Organizations and individuals fought for the ban but with no result until when the legislature has finally expressed its will to comfortably resolve the issue. The issue was driven through different layers of constitutional discussion for a perfect rehearsal. In the effort to present the issue in the congress, Senator John Chaffee claimed major support from activists to introduce a bill that would ban possession of hand guns. His efforts and claims were strongly opposed by retired Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger who supported the possession. The Senator had to force his principles with more effect in order to attract more supporters to his rather weak agitation. The mobilization was not effective and as a result, only four senators were drawn by John Chaffee to his side to vote for the bill. However, President Bush’s personal physician, Dr. Burton Lee, was quoted as saying that the bill would get support from the White House. However, things have eventually turned out to prove what Senator Chaffee’s prayers considerable for the reluctant public as well as the Congress (Mulligan, 1992). According to Hutcheson (1994), gun control was winning the debate in a 216-214 majority support of lawmakers. In the due course of action, it appeared that the NRA constitutional interpretation taking effect. The resultant factor was gun possession proposal losing its approval of the legislature. The prompt response of the government to such a bill was of course on the wake of criminal incidents like drive-by shootings as well as massacre that opened the yes of lawmakers. Hutcheson further observes that NRA crackdown on possession of guns would go in line with the new law established by the lawmakers. Several campaigns had already staged in connection with the ban issue. As part of the awareness campaigns, democratic view allows scope for public counseling of impacts of such issues like abuse of arms. New York City has witnessed several such campaigns take place; in most of such events, the members resolve to surrender their guns or promise not to have one in the future. But the real theme of the meeting is never met- that is the seizure of unlawful weapons and the arrest of lawbreakers. Safety and responsibility is taught in such meetings much to the relief of the public. These two elements are given top priority in the agenda of all anti-crime campaigns in the city as per the reports of Runkle and Rock, who, in the York Daily Record (2001) recorded that more than any anti-crime campaigners, including anti gun campaigners, safety and responsibility agenda was its top agenda. Mostly all the trials and efforts of the National Rifle Association (NRA) resulted in great awareness among public. It played a better role in the anti-crime campaigns than any other organization does but the media would portray it as shooters. This attempt by news agencies and media expertise dealt a great part in demoralizing the objectives of the NRA among the public. In fact, the NRA was only body that propagated campaigns particularly against the misuse of guns by individuals. Washington Post recorded a series of attacks in protest to the unfair media bias to issues on anti-gun lobbying against the NRA attempts to campaign for education on safe and responsible gun possession. Interference of incomplete journals on the issues forced the people into different opinions. Most new journals were on the run for criticism against the NRA even though they knew little about the issue. These scenarios opened the windows to a heated debate as to whether the public should continue to be misguided on the issue of gun possession which was legal in the first place. The debate was on the claims of whether to have guns or not to have them in public possession. A course of volatile arguments led the, NRA members on a more difficult path. They were finally angered by the public ignorance of provisions of law as far as gun possession is concerned. Most of such cases had to be considered as the result of media fabrication of unsolicited issues. Several of issues related to gun battles are on the rise in different parts of America. Students and youth possessing guns became a serious concern for the legislature. While in the wake of such issues a US appeals court ruled against handgun ban in the District of Columbia. According to the Christian Science Monitor (2007), a showdown was looming after the court order. The court appeared to guarantee the constitutional right of individuals to own a gun. Judges are, in most cases not considerate of the precedents of verdicts but the ruling seemed to depart from a 1939 Supreme Court ruling; the panel of judges in its ruling clearly stated the person’s right to possess guns. He Supreme Court in its provisions of the Second Amendment emphasized the deployment of a well regulated militia to maintain security of a Free State in case of insurgency. However security of the public was greater concern for the Christian Science Monitor which pointed out that the security of the public goes further than allowing militia possess guns legally. The very vital element of the argument in the judgment was self defense and not mere constitutional right to possess a gun. It is then the legislature who should decide whether the gun possessed is for safety or guarantee of a citizen’s right. The law in the District of Columbia stated that guns should be disassembled or trigger locked; it led to another argument on the safety of individuals. While possessing an inactive arm is as useless as not having it, the arguments went strong in demand for safety of people. In connection with the observation of debate on the controversial gun handling issue it is therefore evident that gun control measures must involve inclusive consultations where all stakeholders feel to have won their battle in issues of security and safety. While the constitutional rights are guaranteed, there must be regulations on public safety norms. Thus the legislature can enforce laws to protect social interests each time a person is licensed to use a weapon for his personal protection. References Gun Laws as a Right to Safety (2007). The Christian Science Monitor, p.8.  Christian Science Monitor, on September 3, 2010. (Document ID: 1233701881). Hutcheson R., (1994). End of an Era: is the NRA Running out of Political Bullets?: [CITY Edition]. Dayton Daily News, p.11.  Retrieved from: ProQuest Newsstand on September 3, 2010. (Document ID: 235437831). Letters, (2001). York Daily Record, p.10.  Retrieved from: ProQuest Newsstand, on September 3, 2010. (Document ID: 71778956). Mulligan J. E., (1992). “Former Chief Justice Supports Chafees Gun-Control Legislation”,  Providence Journal, 1(1):10.  Retrieved from: ProQuest Newsstand, on September 3, 2010. (Document ID: 577848631). The NRAs Members Protest: [FINAL Edition]. (1998, May 16). The Washington Post, p.14.  Retrieved from: Washington Post on September 3, 2010 (Document ID: 29498163). Read More