The never ending debate

The second amendment of the United States allows people to bear arms in order to form a militia if the government gets too autocratic. This law however, is clearly outdated as, if the government were to get too autocratic, guns would be powerless in front of the drones and tanks owned by the government. Moreover, there has been clear misuse of this law as gun violence in America is on the rise and the fact that there have been more American killed by gun violence than in war is just representative of that fact. 


However, Guns are an important part of American tradition and culture should be preserved, but in states like Alaska, where people over 12 can own hand-guns and felon after 10 Yeats of being released from prison can own a handgun (but not vote) is just asking for trouble.  President Obama once said that his greatest frustration is that nothing is being done to take guns away from the ones who can cause harm to society, this is true because after sandy hook nothing happened which resulted in the Las Vegas massacre after which also sadly, nothing happened. Steps need to be taken so that more innocent lives are not lost.

Comments

  1. Nick M.19 October 2017 at 12:49

    Do you believe that civil disobedience is practical when confronting an issue like gun control? If so what methods would you recommend? It seems to me that civil disobedience is most practical when it can be directed at a specific target, such as a business, place, or person. Gun control is such a complex issue that it might be difficult to find such a target to protest against. Nevertheless, I think this will be an interesting topic to explore because it is so relevant to our current political system.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous26 October 2017 at 23:02

    Aye Myat Mon
    Sid,
    You make valid arguments against the law that allows Americans to own arms. What do you believe is the best way to repeal or at least change this law? What has been done and why weren't they effective in changing the law?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Critiquing the representation of social justice

Image
After working with and writing on your chosen representation, critique the version or manifestation of social justice as defined/illustrated.  How does this depiction of social justice conflict with or work with the legal system? Social Justice can be defined as equity in terms of distribution of wealth, rights and resources within society. The movie Blood Diamond attempts to uncover the lack of this in third world countries as a direct result of the actions of first world countries while demonstrating the advantages people have for having white skin in certain societies. The movie highlights a practice which according to the law is considered smuggling and thus by those means cannot be considered social injustice, however, it is chain reaction caused by this smuggling that makes the practice unethical and socially unjust. The manifestation of social justice in The Blood Diamond is made explicit through the film's plot and central theme, however, throughout the movi...
Read more

Social Justice In Blood Diamond

Social justice is fairness interns of wealth, rights and opportunities. Though idealistically every country should be enforcing this the world is still rampant with social inequality. To spread awareness about these issues some people make movies and one such movie is Blood Diamond. The movie is set in war ridden Sierra Leone in the 1990's and the center story of the film focuses on the journey of the two protagonists Solomon ( A black fisherman)  and Danny ( A white South African mercenary)  who move across the country trying to recover a rare diamond and rescue Solomons son who has been recruited by the rebels. Through this story line the movie showcases the extent of racial injustice present in the world while simultaneously highlighting the problem of warfare in Africa with an emphasis on the social and ethical issue of using children in warfare. Solomons son Dia, wanted to become a doctor when he grew up, however when he was kidnapped and brainwashed by the rebels...
Read more

Distinction should be made on the basis of crime

What do you think the goal of criminal punishment should be?  Would you differentiate between types of crime? Types of offenders? The main goal of criminal punishment should be to punish the criminal for his or her crimes and serving as a form of rehabilitation so that when they reintegrated back into society they do not cause any more harm all while providing justice to the victim. While the other goals should include the possibility of incentivizing people to stay within confines of the law and promote fairness in terms of distribution of opportunity, rights, and resources. I believe it is absolutely critical to differentiate between types of offenders.  Primarily this distinction should be made on the basis of the type of crime: Violent or Non- violent. This is because nonviolent crimes are not as severe as violent crimes and thus nonviolent criminals should be punished, in comparison less than someone who is a violent criminal. Moreover, it is important to physically...
Read more