Relationship Between Political Authority And Moral Autonomy Philosophy Essay

Relationship Between Political Authority And Moral Autonomy Philosophy Essay Every person who possesses both free will and reason has an obligation to take responsibility for her actions. This obligation is not compatible with the recognition of political obligation Discuss this statement with particular reference to the anarchist literature on the obligation to obey the law. Introduction In this essay, I am going to contemplate a fundamental jurisdictional problem of political philosophy, the relationship between political authority and moral autonomy. Value will be given to the concept of political obligation imposed by the state to all individuals. I will then seek to present a number of the most influential theories of anarchist philosophers, that come to invalidate political obligation with respect to the notion of autonomy that each individual possesses. Dealing with the unravelling of todays society, I will eventually defend that the compatibility of individual autonomy with political obligation in a state, is not a futile demand, but rather a reality. The Concept of Political Obligation Throughout the years, the matter of political obligation has been at the at the very heart of political philosophy. One should acknowledge that to have a political obligation is to have a moral duty to obey the laws of ones country or state  [1]  . The basic function of law is to ensure that all humans beings are being treated equally and to protect individuals from injustices of our everyday lives. In approaching this issue, it can be argued that law gives a sense of order and decency among people. According to the author Smith, prima facie obligation to obey the law is owed, not to ones government but rather to ones fellow citizens  [2]  . According to Milne, the central idea of obligation is that of having to do something because it is the right thing to do  [3]  . It can be argued that all individuals of a community must therefore be obliged to respect and obey specific laws in order to maintain and promote the public interest. Law has had a very significant meaning for the dignified passage of man from this life. However it seemed that law at some point prevailed over human beings and did not favor individuals rights. The individuals obligation to obey the law was therefore questioned. Individuals illustrated the main rationale behind political obligation, which was the authority of the government. The problem of political obligation therefore indicated the question as to why citizens of modern states should accept the states claim to be a duty imposer  [4]  . Fundamental topics of political obligation, such as its existence, scope and justification became crucial matters on the debate of political philosophy. position of power is established inequality is automatically created, Inequalities caused by society). Authority is  inherent  with human relationships.  Between the one who  exercises authority and the one  who is affected by it, there is a relationship of inequality. The concept of political obligation was first reversed by anarchists. The complex nature of political obligation concerned anarchists in the ground that when imposed by the state, it came in contrast with individual freedom and autonomy. Political obligation is defined as the clash between the individuals claim to self-governance and the right of the state to claim obedience  [5]  . Anarchism, is the only modern social doctrine that unequivocally rejects the concept of the state with its omnipresent evils of political power and authority  [6]  . Anarchist theory which was opposed to the respect of law, was largely reinforced by opinions by several anarchist philosophers. Anarchist literature acquired fans and along with the creation of many groups they reached to the point to threaten  the  existing political  situation. Anarchist literature on political obligation The examination and analysis of the anarchist literature, is an essential component for the understanding of anarchist views regarding the nature of personal autonomy and its conflict with political obligation. Initially, we must examine what it is meant by anarchism. Anarchy,  is the  state  of affairs  in  which  a society  operates without  authority and mediators. Anarchism supports a situation   in which   everyone  has the first word  on every aspect  of everyday   life,   without  imposed restrictions  and  laws  by  the  state, without hierarchical relations and  exploitation. Anarchist philosophers use the concept of autonomy to argue for the legitimacy of obedience to authority, and emphasize on the individual s right of making up his own mind based on the ideal of moral autonomy  [7]  . Authority is a political problem in relation to anarchism, which is why anarchism requires the  abolition  of the state. Anarchism  does not mean   unlimited   freedom   nor   denied  responsibility. As Kropotkin argued,  socialism, must become less dependent upon indirect government through elected representatives, it must become more  self-governing  [8]  . Kropotkin justified his own theory on anarchism. According to his point of view, anarchy  is  the  name given  to a theory  of life  and  conduct  under which society functions without  government  [9]  . In such a society, the  harmony succeeds   not   through obedience  to  the  law,  but  with free agreements concluded  between  various  groups  [10]  . Humans could achieve  the full  development of all  skills,  intellectual,  artistic  and moral  without being  hindered by  the  overtime  in favor of  the monopolists  by or  the  servility  and inactivity  of  mind  of the  vast majority  [11]  .   Anarchism is considered the only political doctrine consistent with the virtue of autonomy  [12]  . The significant philosopher Paul Wolff in his book In Defense of Anarchism, concludes that the moral autonomy of the individual will never be compatible with the legitimate authority of the state. He argues that a citizen cannot retain his autonomy and at the same time be under an obligation to obey the commands of the state simply because they are the commands of the state  [13]  . He indicated how a citizen is related to the commands of authority by expressing that the autonomous man is not subject to the will of another and he may do what another tells him, but not because he has been told to do it, because for the autonomous man, there is no such thing as a command and therefore he is politically free  [14]  . Anarchists disapprove authority of the state because they support that no one within a society should be under rules. Wolff supports that authority is defined to be the right to command and correlatively, the right to be obeyed  [15]  . He considers on that basis that the defining mark of the state is authority, the right to rule, while the primary obligation of man is autonomy, the refusal to be ruled  [16]  . Illustrating the incompatibility of the concept of authority with the rationale of autonomy, was similarly expressed by the political philosopher Raz, who pointed out that authority sometimes requires action against ones own judgment and consequently it requires abandoning ones moral autonomy and since all practical questions may involve moral considerations, all practical authority denies moral autonomy and is consequently immoral  [17]  . The well-known Russian revolutionary Bakunin, supported that the principle of authority that is applied to men who have attained their majority, becomes a monstrosity, a flagrant denial of humanity, a source of slavery and intellectual and moral depravity  [18]  . He consequently concluded to the consideration that the only grand and omnipotent authority, at once natural and rational, the only one which we may respect, will be that of the collective and public spirit of a society founded on equality and solidarity and the mutual human respect of all its members  [19]  . Accordingly, Bakunin elucidated possible future developments by arguing that the future social organization must be made solely from the bottom upwards, by the free association or federation of workers, firstly in their unions, then in communes, regions, nations and finally in a great federation, international and universal  Ã‚  [20]  . The dominant model of autonomy can be argued to be the exact opposite of authority. As a political ideal, autonomy is used as a basis to argue against the design and functioning of political institutions that attempt to impose a set of ends, values and attitudes upon the citizens of a society  [21]  . Kant described the protection of autonomy at the political level and stated that each person had the right to any action that can coexist with the freedom of every other person in accordance with universal law  [22]  . For that reason, he stated that instead of being obedient to an externally imposed law, one should be obedient to ones own self-imposed law, adding that the autonomous man is not subject to the will of another  [23]  . On that basis, Rawls expressed that the concept of Kantian constructivism was to establish a connection  between  the first  principles of  justice and   the   conception  of moral  persons  as  free and  equal. With the ai m of describing the rejection of political institutions by autonomy, it is significant to present McLaughlins view which states that anarchists reject the traditional claims made for the legitimacy of state authority and challenge those authoritative powers which cannot justify their claims and which are therefore deemed illegitimate or without moral foundation  [24]  . As an aspect, autonomy is generally intertwined with the right to pursue ones interests without undue restriction  [25]  . It is crucial to affirm that Proudhon achieved one  of the most   important   contributions  in anarchist  theory  and socialism  in general. He declared  the  idea,  that the great complexity  of social  life, required decentralization and  autonomy of  communities  [26]  .  The basic outline of the argument, is that through  the complexity of  the  interests  and advancement  of  ideas, society is   forced   to  renounce  the  state, by  devaluing  the  mechanism  of the government under the  shade  of  its  political  institutions  [27]  . Proudhon  argued that society slowly   and silently formed  its own  organization,  building  for  itself  a new order  which reflects   the vitality   and   autonomy  Ã‚  [28]  . It is prima facie impermissible to interfere with an individuals right of autonomy where the individual is respectful of that right in others  [29]  . Autonomy,  found  a constructive expression in Mills writings. The philosopher defends the rights of individuals to pursue their own personal goals, and emphasizes the need for being ones own person  [30]  . According to Mill, the conduct of anyone in the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute and over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign  [31]  . Every individual who possesses free will, has self-control and at the same time rejects any need of control by authority. Having no people to control, authority faces(antimetopizi) autonomy as the central threat to its existence. Following  a  middle path  compatibility will arrive In defending my position, I consider that authority and its entailed duty to obey, can be compatible with and basically necessary to individual autonomy. In a modern democracy, obligation to obey the law must be exercised to benefit society. By obeying laws, which constitute the basis of the democracy, we ensure a stable regime of democracy, which has been revealed to be the most ideal throughout the centuries. The functioning of constitutional institutions and processes of political democracy provides opportunities, wider organizational  framework and   ideological debate. In order for democracy to be maintained, law must exist. In view of that John Locke provided the idea that every man, that hath any possessions, or enjoyment, of any part of the dominions of any government, doth thereby give his tacit consent, and is as far forth obliged to obedience to the laws of that government, during such enjoyment, as anyone under it  [32]  . In defending obligation to obey the law, we have a duty to support and to comply with just institutions that exist and apply to us  [33]  . It is a necessity therefore for the individuals to understand that all rules require a positive effort to comply, which cannot be achieved passively  [34]  . As Philip Soper demonstrated, we have a duty to respect those officials who in good faith strive to further the common good by maintaining the rule of law, by acknowledging a duty to obey the law  [35]  . Everyone would agree, that in order to refrain from murder, rape, or breach of contract, there is a prima facie obligation to obey specific laws in order not to violate laws which prohibit these acts. Accordingly, the philosopher Baier held the view that a universal obedience to certain rules that override self-interest, would produce a state of affairs which serves everyones interest much better than the unaided pursuit off it in a state where everybody does the same  [36]  . The state, gives the ordinary citizen freedom to express his opinion in the political process. According to my estimation, obligations of people before the law, do not bound them as to the extent of not being able to have their own judgment or opinion. The authority of the state, can affect the lives of citizens, but citizens can influence policy as well. The existing political system and legislation allows people to apply their judgment through their right to vote. The ordinary citizen cannot suggest any law, but the system of democracy allows him to express his opinion, by giving him the right to vote his representatives who will suggest laws to be voted. Furthermore, in some constitutions the public opinion applies. The courts in the United kingdom have the interpretation of legislation and meander more regularly according to the public opinion, instead of legislation. This justifies that constant efforts are being made by the state, for the fair administration of human situations , in order for the state not to violate the citizens human rights. Nonetheless, several laws that are suggested, favor a certain group of people while others are left aside. The only solution for those whose rights are being violated, is the mobilization  and  massive reaction towards everything that is not  good for us, namely an anarchist reaction. Anarchism is the public opinion that has affected the political system, and it is necessary in order to balance autonomy with the obligation to obey the law. Anarchists display the view, that autonomous persons are in a kind of authoritative control of their own choices, actions and goals and that guarantees that a persons life is free of the domination of others  [37]  , This is regarded to be an extreme view, but this does not mean we must become extremists, because it would then mean non compliant to social norms and therefore law. What I would suggest, is that where we feel that regulations treat us wrong and limit our autonomy, it is there where we should at least show an anarchist reaction. It is only there, that we are obliged to be anarchists and not in all aspects of our lives and on everything that might be imposed upon us. It is worth establishing that I am not canceling all laws, but anarchists have opened our eyes by indicating us that we should not have blind obedie nce to law. As Harris stated, those for whom the law has come weight in their moral decision-making, are entitled to question the need for the law, just as they are entitled to question any other rule that has moral import for their decisions on how to act  [38]  . Hence, those responsible for the law have an obligation to take these views into account in a dispassionate and reasoned way, for that is a requirement of the moral point of view under reasoned discourse  [39]  . Whatever does not benefit us as human beings we must try and overturn it towards the best. In view of the fact that although anarchists thoughts on autonomy are accurate, anarchism by itself is neither possible nor desirable in a political system. The principle of autonomy in terms of defending individual choices and decisions, promotes human individuality and it could be criticized that it overlooks the importance of social relationships and dependency. Individuals need to depend on each other in order to succeed in the path of life. It would be detrimental for  constant revolutionizing to exist because people need stability in their lives. No anarchism  regime has survived  in  practice and this situation justifies the fact that the value of autonomy can be seen as compatible with the social need. On that basis, law should be desirable because it works as a mediator to the maintenance of good human relationships and will provide the stability in peoples lives. The reasoning of the great philosopher Hobbes is to be welcomed, because it demonstrates that individual s without government, would be tremendously unlikely to live in security and peaceful cooperation, by identifying that we would violently compete to secure the basic necessities of life, we would fight out of fear so as to ensure our personal safety, and we would seek glory for its protective effects  [40]  . Law will protect the weak from the powerful one. For that reason, law is required to provide legislation, that is accepted and obeyed by all individuals as a means that protects their rights and does not restrict their autonomy. Finally, free will and responsibility  must  be applicable  within  a  more temperate policy system. Analyzing the concept of political obligation and anarchists views on autonomy, we can assume that they encompass outcomes that are both good and bad. Even so, what both represent, are absolute and radical views and those kind of views cannot and must not prevail. We are free and sentient beings, who should realize that government was created because human needed it and therefore it would be intolerable from us to use anarchism as a means of breaking down the system. What I would suggest, is to successfully arrange some form of government. This will be achieved if we uphold the moderate views and combine them, and only then will we be able to reach a desirable result, that will satisfy everyone. In order to accomplish that, law must give importance to autonomy and its fundamental role it plays in our understanding of the world, and in the way we structure and organize societ y  [41]  . In addition, individuals that are affected by law, must positively accept and apply it in their everyday lives. It is significant to establish that politics are considered to be the science and art of alternative solutions. As a result, government must be able to reconcile the authority of the state with the autonomy of the individual, in order to manage uncertainties and risks to society. It was realized by Hobbes, that our attention must not be focused on the question of social and political order, but rather on how to maximize liberty, how to define social justice, how to draw the limits of government power, and how to realize democratic ideals  [42]  . The state must release innovative social forces, increase social wealth, choices and opportunities and minimize the fear and insecurity generated by the scientific and technological revolution, globalization, integration and expansion of markets and the personalization process in todays society. Following Rawls thought, the intuitive idea is to design the social system so that the outcome is just whatever it happens to be, at least so lo ng as it is within a certain range  [43]  . Government needs to convent this problem into an opportunity. Authority is a form of domination, it is a dominative power, that involves the capacity of one party to exercise control over another party  [44]  . I and I alone, am ultimately responsible for the decisions I make, and am in that sense autonomous  [45]  . Acting autonomously is acting from principles that we would consent to as free and equal rational beings  [46]  . generally intertwined with the right to pursue ones interests without undue restriction Primary question Conclusion As has been shown, several legal philosophical issues arising from the concept of political obligation and the value of autonomy, have been analyzed and embodied in this essay. Extensive investigation of political and anarchist literature helped us root out whether a harmonic relationship between individuals moral autonomy and the political obligation to obey the law can be established. Carole Pateman and John Simmons have argued that political obligation is an unsolved problem for liberal theory  [47]  . Nevertheless, this essay depicts that moral autonomy and political obligation can and should coexist. Autonomy should be conscientiously guarded, with both knowledge and awareness of its usefulness to the humanity. It is justified that, This situation can constitute an attitude that over time, if not reversed, will take such dimensions, that will theory that is based on the idea that individual autonomy is a fundamental political value picture of the world

Primary School Art Teaching Mission Statement

Mission Statement My main aims with teaching art to primary grades can be broken down to the following points: ) Experimentation (teaching them to overcome any fear of unfamiliar materials) b) Imagination (teaching them that the mind has no limits, allowing them to dream) c) Individualism (teaching them to think ‘ outside the box’ ) d) Freedom of expression (teaching them to not be afraid to show feelings and to do it in their own personal style) e) Problem solving (teaching them that there are no mistakes in art; that any error can be fixed if you go about it cleverly) f) Self-esteem (teaching them to be proud of their work and to never insult the work of others) g) Sharing (teaching them to share materials and ideas with the rest of the class) h) Recycling (teaching them to use, re-use and recycle objects one would normally throw away) i) Patience (teaching them that no good work of art can be rushed and that one has to follow a process and see it through to the end) j ) Respect (teaching them to have respect for the teacher, their classmates, materials and the opinions of others) My aim is to try and create a disciplined space for the children to work in.Art is often a subject that requires the teacher to allow the children a certain amount of fun and freedom, however, fun turns into chaos if it has no ordered structure and discipline. I try and allow the children to follow their own instincts, so the result becomes secondary to individual expression. I do not believe in â€Å"paint by numbers†, nor do I force the children to follow a formula. There are formal elements like colour, composition etc. that is imperative, but sometimes the formal elements have to be sacrificed to allow the child to freely create. The process is often more important than the end product. Through art, children learn a lot about themselves. Their inner discovery is more important than a â€Å"good† work of art.

Illegal Immigration Speech Essay

Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. These words are engraved on the Statue of Liberty that was assembled in 1886. The statue was meant to be a beacon of hope for all immigrants that enter the U.S. Do we still agree with what those words say? I’m not against all of the immigrants who want to start a better life here by becoming legal citizens. I’m against the millions of illegal immigrants that come to the U.S. and cause trouble and make things harder for the legal immigrants that are already here. Illegal immigrants have long been a problem in the United States, and there have always been so many controversies about illegal immigration Today, I would like to inform you about the serious problems illegal immigration could cause. First, by giving you all the facts, and by explaining how illegal immigration, if continued, will affect our lives. Transition: I’ll start by telling you about some illegal immigration facts and its history. Body 1 Americans have always been realistic about illegal immigration, but if it continues at the rate it is, we will be in trouble. a The biggest issue is the fact that the U.S. is in the middle of another great wave of illegal immigration. b In 2000, the US Census Bureau puts the estimate of illegal immigrants at 8.7million. Since then, United States immigration officials have said the number has grown by as much as 500,000 a year. c If immigration continues at current levels, the nation’s population will increase from 301 million today to 468 million in 2060 – a 167 million, or 56% increase. 2 Did you know that the country is spending massive amount of money on illegal immigrants each year? a According to illegalimmigrationstatistics.org Illegal immigrants costs the U.S. $130 billion each year b And each year we’re paying $1117 each year to support the illegal immigrants. 3 Illegal immigrants are a great danger to America. According to the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, more than 50% of illegal immigrants that come to America break laws, steal, rape, murder, form and join gangs, sell drugs and engage in the trade of illegal weapons. a Statistics show that illegal immigrants cost the federal prison and court system over 1 billion dollars each year. b 95% of outstanding warrants for homicide in Los Angeles are for illegal immigrants Transition : Transition: If proper steps are taken to reduce illegal immigration, we will see a great  improvement in our society. 4 Most Americans know our basic laws regarding illegal immigration. It is illegal to enter the United States without permission. The first time an illegal immigrant is caught in the US it is a misdemeanor civil offense. This is because we want to be able to quickly return illegal aliens back to where they come from, when they are caught at the border without the rigors of a jury trial. a After the first offense, being caught a second time is a felony! b It is also against the law to overstay a visa issued by the US Government and illegal for an employer to knowingly hire illegal immigrants. Transition. With the government working together to reduce illegal immigration, we are bound to see improvement in our county. Conclusion If illegal immigration can be stopped, many people all over the country will receive benefits. a The U.S. will save money if we don’t have to spend it on care for illegal immigrants, and then the U.S can use that money for better causes, like more money for education. b The U.S. will become a safer place for us to live in, without the increased crime rates illegal immigrants caused. Transition: Now that you have a better understanding of the harms that illegal immigration causes, here are a few things you can do. 1. Read the paper and watch the news. New developments are occurring everyday in our society; know what is going on in the world around you. 2. Spread it out, talk to people about this, have discussions with them. 3. Register to vote. What’s the first thing you do when you turn 16? You go out and get your driver’s license. When you turn 18, make registering to vote your first priority. 4. I’ve explained to you the facts of immigration and how, if continued, will affect your life as an individual. So now that you are informed. Have a say in your future and stand up for what you believe in. It all has to do with how you want to live your life.

Freedom vs. Gun Control Essay - 1673 Words

The right to bear arms has been a part of this country’s constitution since its conception in 1776. Guns we originally a commodity that almost every household had. Firearms were used for hunting and protection. As the modern era came upon us, there became a lesser need to own a firearm because of a controlled police force and a surplus in food. The surplus in food and modern law enforcement, along with rising firearm crimes prompted the government to start reviewing gun laws. Furthermore, over the past century the right to bear a firearm has been restricted by many laws. These laws are instated to help prevent accidental and planned deaths attributed by firearms. The question still stands: can gun-safety laws help prevent accidental and†¦show more content†¦Even with these gun laws instated there is a continuing stream of gun related violence accruing everyday. Events like Columbine have triggered a chain of copycat school shootings around the country. School, which a t one point were looked at as a place of sanguinary, have now been thorn full force into gun violence. Many politicians and people alike believe that we are not being hard enough criminals to deter people from committing these acts of gun violence. â€Å"These young guys today they’ll shoot a whole crowd in broad daylight just to get one dead† (Guns and violence, 30). In the world today there is so much media violence shown on TV, movies, video games, and in the newspaper, it is hard to ex cape from the reality, which we have sounded ourselves by everyday. More and more kids are using violence to solve problems. It has become such an epidemic in our schools, that the government has sent out a booklet on what to look for in kids who commit these crimes. About 350,000 booklets have been sent out to all schools in this nation to tell parents, educators, other students who might be doing the kinds of things that have happened in Jonesboro and in Littleton. There have been many advances in gun control over the years. Recently there has been the uses of gun safety locks that prevent anyone form using the gun by covering the trigger. Also the so-called smart gun, which does not fire unless the ownerShow MoreRelatedThe Constitution And The Declaration Of Independence1712 Words   |  7 Pagesbear arms is what grants people freedom as they are able to defend themselves from any life threatening dangers. However, this amendment has not been exercised correctly in the U.S which makes it one of the most dangerous amendment as well. But, this amendment still plays a crucial role in people s daily lives as they can protect themselves if there is any harm to their lives. Thus, it is important for this amendment to be reinforced even more to where owning guns is actually safe. Stated in anRead MoreThe Bill Of Rights Of The United States1557 Words   |  7 PagesThe Bill of Rights lists certain freedoms and liberties that are guaranteed to the people of the United States of America. Because these rights are in the Constitution, they are federal laws that apply to everyone in America. To ensure there was no question as to who the Bill of Rights applied to, the Fourteenth Amendment was passed in 1868 giving anyone born in, or a citizen of, the United States the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. The amendment left clauses giving some interpretationRead MoreEssay on The Democrats and The Republicans: On The Issues1684 Words   |  7 Pagespolitical parties such as Republicans, on the right, and Democrats, on the left side. These two political parties show philosophical differences through their viewpoints on major topics such as the economy, separation of church and state, abortion, and gun control. Concerning the debate on our economy, republicans generally believe strongly in the power of a free market system, reduced income tax rate, more spending from the people, and less spending from the government. The Republican Party wants theRead MoreThe Issue Of Gun Ownership1502 Words   |  7 Pagesruled against gun bans or regulations as violating the 2nd amendment. In the landmark ruling Heller vs. District of Columbia in 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that a thirty-two year ban on the private ownership of handguns in the District of Columbia was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court decided that the Second Amendment implies that the government cannot enact an outright ban on commonly held weapons or prevent citizens from having a gun at home for lawful uses. The decision D.C. vs. Heller meansRead MoreGun Control Vs. Gun Rights968 Words   |  4 PagesGun Control vs. Gun Rights With conservatives, liberals, and moderates continuously arguing about what is right for this country or what is morally or politically correct, we are forced to find a compromised middle-ground, because it can be the difference between life and death in many unfortunate cases. Conservatives believe that The Second Amendment allows citizens the right to bear arms and protect their individual, inalienable rights. They believe that there are too many gun control laws andRead MoreThe Second Amendment Of The United States1367 Words   |  6 Pageshabitual, therefore, people fear guns and want to enact gun control laws. Recent attacks from terrorist groups spark the question of who should have the right to own guns. Controversies over interpreting the Second Amendment date back to the turn of the twentieth century because so many viewpoints and regulations have accumulated; it is all in the manner of which interpretation citizens subscribe to- loose verses strict interpretation. Due to the controversies, certain gun regulations have been enactedRead MoreGun Control Thesis Statement Essay781 Words   |  4 PagesStatement: Gun control decreases crime. If gun control is regulated, then we will have less crime. Access to firearms makes killing easy, efficient, and impersonal, which increases the lethality of crime. Josh Sugarmann, the Executive Director of the Violence Policy Center has once said, We recoil in horror and search for explanations, but we never face up to the obvious preventive measure: a ban on the handy killing machines that make crimes so easy.†Allowing untrained people to carry guns puts othersRead More1st and 2nd Amendment1723 Words   |  7 Pagesï » ¿ The First and Second Amendments of the United States Constitution On September 25, 1789, The Bill Of Rights was submitted to the states for approval, based on the previous Constitutions insufficient assurances for civil freedom, liberties and justice. Concerned that the Constitution neglected to clearly state the basic civil rights of the citizens of the United States, Anti- Federalists opposed the Articles of Confederations, which gave state governments more authority (â€Å"Bill of Rights, n.dRead MoreHandguns Should Not Be Banned Handguns1677 Words   |  7 Pages Gun violence, especially that as caused by handguns, is a major problem in America. It affects millions of people annually, and the effects it has are irreversible. However, this reality does not constitute for a complete ban on the private ownership of handguns. A ban on the private ownership of handguns should not be enacted on the grounds that the United States government ought to preserve democratic legitimacy and constitutionalism, and a ban is not feasible or just in America ’s politicalRead MoreGun Control Laws Will NOT Reduce Crime Essay1115 Words   |  5 Pages From the beginning of our nation up to today, we as a country have debated some of the most trying topics known to man. One topic that continues to make its way into our everyday lives is the epic â€Å"Gun Rights vs. Gun Control† argument. Opinions on both sides range from moderate to extreme, and some have even attempted extreme measures to get their points across. No matter what side of the argument you fall on, chances are, at some point, you can see the other point of view. It is this that causes