Chhim 1

Thearith Chhim
Lynn Taylor
English 1010
15 April 2016
Gun Control and the Second Amendment
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. The right to bear arms is so ingrained into
our society that even the mention of some kind of stiff gun control law or weapon bans can cause
an uproar. The fact that the United States tops other developed countries in firearm deaths is
quite disturbing and undeniably people still argue that their gun rights shall not be infringed. So
with the information Ill be presenting in this paper, youve got to ask yourself Is it really
necessary in this day and age for citizens to own guns?
Most people who are against gun control would argue that individual ownership of guns
is protected by the constitutions second amendment and that enacting gun control laws would
infringe upon the right to bear arms. The constitution should be interpreted based on the original
founders intent. Back then the Second Amendment only applied to keeping and bearing arms for
military purposes (Barrett). As our country has evolved since 1776 is important and what our
country needs now is important, so in the case of guns, its important that our views on guns
should reflect the times we live in. When you look back at the Second Amendment theres no
evidence of it being about owning guns for protection or hunting. It definitely focused on
militias (Levintova et al). In 2008 the Supreme Court held that law-abiding citizens have the
right to handguns in their homes for protection. Yet the court added in Like most rights, the

Chhim 2
right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited, and also wrote that the Second
Amendment is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever
and for whatever purpose. (Winkler et al). In short Justice Scalia states that theres plenty of
room under the Second Amendment for gun control.
According to the American Journal of Medicine which has done studies on gun deaths
compared to other countries and found that Americans are 10 times more like to be killed by
guns than people in other developed countries. Overall, our results show that the U.S., which
has the most firearms per capita in the world, suffers disproportionately from firearms compared
with other high-income countries, and These results are consistent with the hypothesis that our
firearms are killing us rather than protecting us, (Preidt et al). Research also found that
compared people in high-income nations, Americans are seven times more likely to die from
violence and six times more likely to be accidentally killed by a gun. More than two-thirds of the
homicides in the U.S. are firearm homicides. Researchers also points out that numerous studies
suggest that reduced access to guns would lower the suicide rate in the U.S. "Differences in
overall suicide rates across cities, states and regions in the United States are best explained not
by differences in mental health, suicide ideation, or even suicide attempts, but by availability of
firearms," (Preidt et al).
Lets put into perspective of how guns are used for defense, if at all. Hemenway did a
study on owning guns for self-defense and/or thwarting crime and proved that owning guns and
implementing it for these purposes was actually quite rare. The study found that states with more
gun ownership had more gun related crime and burglaries, because thieves also like to steal guns.
According to National Crime Victimization Survey which is surveyed twice a year, assisted by
Sara Solnick, Professor of Economics at the University of Vermont, found that 42% of the

Chhim 3
victims used mace, yelled, struggled, ran away or called the police instead of using a gun. When
it comes to women, more than 300 sexual assaults reported, the number of times guns were used
was zero. Out of 1,100 sexual assaults in a previous 10-year survey study found that only one
victim used a gun. The study also found that using a mace is just as effective as a gun would be
and proves that not having a gun in the household doesnt increase your chance of being robbed,
injured or killed by a criminal compared to a household that has a gun. Instead the evidence
proves overwhelmingly that a gun in the household would increase the chance that someone
would accidentally get shot or engage in a homicide or suicide (Hemenway).
Opponents of gun control claims multiple reasons as to why it doesnt work such as:
Second Amendment shall not be infringed, gun control laws do not deter crime, only gun
ownership deters crime. The laws infringe upon the right to self-defense and deny people a sense
of safety, the threat of a tyrannical government, background checks and micro-stamping are an
invasion of privacy, gun control simply doesnt work (ProCon.org).
The counter to these arguments would be that the Second Amendment was written in a
time of muskets and a tyrannical king thousands of miles away, now we have semi-auto guns and
a highly developed society of our own and it is time to evolve. Studies has proven actual
utilization of a gun by a law-abiding, responsible owner is actually rare. I agree up to a point to
the fact that people need a gun for protection or to feel safe seems to stem from human nature,
to protect one self and our culture of guns. Its human psychology, people feel powerful when
owning a gun, but we dont need it. Now if the government ever became tyrannical, which only
about 8% of the country believes that according to a recent Pew survey (Kaye). The threat of
tyranny is unlikely and if it did happen, citizens could never put up a fight with our modern

Chhim 4
military anyways. One point I tend to agree with opponents of gun control is the fact that gun
control laws enacted today doesnt work, because we simply dont take it seriously enough.
From my examination of these sources I have learned that most of the citizens that owns
or carry a gun will not utilize it. In the heat of the moment most people will resort to some other
means of defending themselves or simply flee. It is a fantasy to think that if you carry a gun
around and something bad happens, youll be there to save the day. Nonsense. It comes off as a
little pretentious, to think that you need a gun to protect your home or your family, how many
enemies do you have?! So is it necessary for citizens to own and carry guns? No. With the high
crime rates attributed to guns, its definitely not worth keeping it around. Guns do more harm
than good in the hands of todays citizens, because it is rarely used for good intentions. Although
it may be unfeasible to ban weapons, but at least a really strict gun law should be enacted that
works, which sadly I doubt. I know many are passionate about not infringing upon the second
amendment, I do not want to take anyones rights away, especially a fundamental right such as
self-defense. Therein lies the confusion of the Second Amendment, the word amendment, it can
be changed, especially in this day and age.

Chhim 5
Work Cited
Barrett, Paul M. Gun Control and the Constitution: Should We Amend the Second
Amendment? Bloomberg Business Week. Bloomberg, 20 Feb. 2014. Web. 13 Jul 2014.
Hemenway, David. "The Self-Defense Myth." Los Angeles Times. 04 Aug. 2015: A.11. SIRS
Issues Researcher. Web. 15 Apr. 2016.
Kaye, Anson. "Guns and the Tyranny of Extreme Rhetoric." U.S. News. U.S. News, 24 Jan.
2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2016.
Levintova, Hannah. "The Second Amendment Doesn't Say What You Think It Does." Mother
Jones. Mother Jones, 19 June 2014. Web. 17 Apr. 2016.
Preidt, Robert. "How U.S. Gun Deaths Compare to Other Countries." CBSNews. CBS
Interactive, 3 Feb. 2016. Web. 17 Apr. 2016.
ProCon.org. "Gun Control ProCon.org." ProCon.org. 26 Feb. 2016. Web. 17 Apr. 2016
Winkler, Adam. "The Second Amendment Is All for Gun Control." The Daily Beast.
Newsweek/Daily Beast, 17 Feb. 2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2016.