Law Abiding and Defenseless

In: Other Topics

Submitted By okimar10
Words 1469
Pages 6
Robert Harris
Professor Garn
EN102
12 February 2015
“The Law Abiding and Defenseless” Three robbers entered a Commerce City Colorado residence, one of them pulled out a knife, according to officials. The two men and a woman apparently had planned to rob an acquaintance: but the homeowner resisted the threat, drawing his semiautomatic handgun and shooting the two men. After the three fled, they called for medical help from a cousin's house. The police followed shortly thereafter. "As soon as they get out of the hospital, we'll be there to meet and greet them," said Sgt. Craig Coleman of the Adams County Sheriff's Dept. (rifleman). These are two of many different stories that are produced monthly by the magazine American Rifleman. Every issue gives 4 to 7 stories on how handgun's save lives every day. There are many people who believe that a handgun can save your life, but there also people who believe that they are just used for bad guys to kill. The Constitution states that we have the right to keep and bear arms, but there are some groups that have decided that is not right. They will do whatever it takes to change Amendment 2. This year there was a new gun law added to the long list of gun laws. In Colorado and Oregon the law was passed with a huge margin. The law states that you cannot buy a gun at a gun show without a background check, and for it to be a gun show there only needs to be 3 or more people. So, in other words many of the police officers in the world will now be breaking the law when the switch guns with other officers. For instance, there are four officers standing around at the police station, and a couple of them decided to try out each other gun for a day or two. Under this new law, the officers have now broken the law. Many gun owners say there is no need for this new law. The NRA and many other pro-gun groups did everything they…...

Similar Documents

Gun Control Laws Should Not Be Strengthened

...Gun control laws should not be strengthened, instead they should be enforced. Instead of making it harder for law-abiding citizens to obtain guns, guns should be taken away from unstable individuals or people who should not have guns like criminals. The first reason why gun control should not be strengthened is that citizens have the right to own guns; it is one of those entitlements that makes the United States different from other countries. Secondly, criminals are criminals and that is why they are called criminals, they don’t follow the law; basically if a criminal wants a gun they will get a gun, legally or not. My third reason is that guns are used for protection. Strengthening gun control laws will not prevent violence, guns aren’t the only tool used to hurt people, and people will use other objects to hurt people if they can’t have guns. Without a gun, murderers will still murder people whether they use a gun, knife, baseball bat, or any other object, it doesn’t matter. If not that many citizens have guns thanks to stronger gun laws, what if the government becomes tyrannical or does not protect the citizens’ rights? Well they won’t be able to do anything because they will be helpless, they can’t take out the leaders and fix the government. The second amendment states, “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. Adolf Hitler took away guns from the Jewish people......

Words: 1117 - Pages: 5

Gun Laws

...not have them. Some believe that guns kill people. Some believe that there should be strict control on guns. What do you believe? I personally believe that yes there should be some restrictions on gun control but not as much as the government wants us to have. Guns should be restricted from those who have mental disorders, guns should be restricted from those whom also have violent criminal offenses behind them. Guns should not be made hard for law abiding legal citizens to acquire. There should not be strict rules on clip size. If there is a restriction on clip size what happens when a criminal attacks and has a large clip size and you don’t because you follow the law and they don’t. Guns may not be banned from sale they might not be impossible to get but the government is making it harder for us to get them. The right to bear arms is our right and It should not be possible to change that or take it away. Some conspiracies say that all of these shootings are staged. A lot of people believe that is was a act to help pass gun laws performed by paid actors. There are pictures showing how some of these people are connected from incident to incident. Should these conspiracies be believed or just passed off as another myth and not given a chance. In fact the more gun shootings there are the worse it looks for Obamas plan to pass. I think that people feel they need their guns in order to protect themselves....

Words: 270 - Pages: 2

A Rebuttal of "Disarming Law-Abiding Citizens Doesn't Make Them Any Safer"

...A Rebuttal of “Disarming Law-abiding Citizens Doesn't Make Them Any Safer" Larry N. Farmer BCOM 275 August 5, 2013 Steve Boylan Abstract A Rebuttal of “Disarming Law-abiding Citizens Doesn't Make Them Any Safer" In the article, “Disarming law-abiding citizens doesn’t make them any safer”, (Spartanburg Harold-Journal, 2012) the Spartanburg Harold talks about the ban on guns will leave law-abiding citizens vulnerable to criminals, terrorists and homicidal lunatics. In this paper I will discuss some of the laws that will refute this claim. In the quote “The media is largely made up of people who don’t understand guns.” (Spartanburg Harold-Journal, 2012) the Harold makes a fallacious statement due to the fact that the media uses several different sources which includes gun manufacturers, experts on guns and law enforcement agencies. The Harold also makes the statement that the gun control lobbyists are too quick to assume that the problem is the weapons that are used. Instead they know it is not the guns. They are just trying to make it harder for that type of person or persons from getting the guns or that type of gun. Let us look at the Brady Handgun Control Act of 1993. (Library of Congress, 1993) It does not take away handguns. Instead it just adds a five day waiting period for a background check to be performed. This way those with criminal backgrounds will not be getting their hands on handguns or any gun. It also made it where state and local police were......

Words: 737 - Pages: 3

Corporation Law

...majority voting power;A personal right of a member would be eliminated; It would result in the company’s property being taken by some directors / members; It is a fraud on a power (ie for an improper purpose) Director must act in good faith ie honestly; Must do what they believe is best for the company, not themselves or a particular stakeholder group (eg majority of members) S 187, Directors are taken to meet the requirements if: Constitution expressly authorises;Act in good faith in best interests of holding company;Company not in solvent or made insolvent Facts Board meeting refers to the meeting held for researching and making decision on corporation’s big issues and urgent matter (Zeberkiewicz, 2011). The legal principle of corporation law on board of directors’ resolution is based on its property, function and right of autonomy. Board of directors’ resolution should be through by directors’ voting, which is beneficial to promote directors’ active participation to the resolution (Cheung, 2013). With the purpose of avoiding the occurrence of unreasonable situation that the resolution is passed by few directors’ voting, there are corresponding stipulations on the principles of board of directors’ resolution. Also, directors have a duty to prevent their company incurring debts when the company is insolvent or would become insolvent based on S189. According to the Mabo’s case, Pandora Diamonds and Gems Pty Ltd which operating importing, wholesaling and retailing......

Words: 2748 - Pages: 11

Business Law

...restrictions on gun ownership? The answer to this question may vary by the people you ask some people may say yes but others will say either the restrictions need to be increased or they need dropped. I will explain to you exactly what the second amendment says. I will also explain the negative side of gun control and the restrictions that come along with ownership. I want you to realize just how true this statement is, “Guns don’t kill people, People kill people.” I have been raised around guns and I have been taught about gun safety. I want for you to see that as United States Citizens, we have the right to protect ourselves and our homes from criminals. If the government continues to take away our right to keep and bear arms, we will be defenseless against those that wish to harm us. What would happen if the military lost their fire arms? They would not be able to defend our country and how much sense does that make? Do you think that our president lives in a home that is not protected? I don’t consider a security system true protection and I am sure that he doesn’t either. I do find that the rules to the Carry Concealed permit (CCP) are good and yes, they do allow for new gun owners to learn how to handle the gun safely and to know when they do have the right to use it. But for the government to consider taking our guns is completely wrong. The second amendment states, “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the......

Words: 1611 - Pages: 7

Law Is the Law

...inform a motorist at the end of a traffic stop that they are free to go before seeking permission to search the motorist’s car (Wikipedia 2011). In the case, respondent Robert D. Robinette was stopped for speeding by Deputy Roger Newsome of the Montgomery County Sheriff Office, since he had no prior violation; the officer gave him a verbal warning and returned his driver’s license(Cornell University Law School 1996). Shortly After, the deputy asked Robinette, before he gets going whether he was carrying any illegal contraband, weapons, drug’s, or such things in his car. That’s when Robinette answered that he did not have any of those things in his car. Then the deputy asked him if he would let him search the car for such things and Robinette gave consent to a search of the car. At the same time Robinette, felt like he had to let the officer search the car because he did not know that he could have simply said no and been free to go. Robinette, along with many other citizens feel that they do not have a choice in denying a request by a police officer. They are not familiar with the laws and rights that they have, especially during a routine traffic stop. There was no probable cause that gave the officer reason to search the vehicle. In the search, Deputy Newsome found a small amount of marijuana and a tablet of ecstasy, that turned out to be methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) (Google Scholar 2011).Robinette was arrested and charged with knowing possession of a controlled......

Words: 1750 - Pages: 7

Are Women More Law Abiding Then Men

...Are women more law-abiding then men? Why or why not? By Tayla Batten In most societies of the past and present, women are perceived as being inferior and passive. Women are biologically seen to be emotional, docile, nurturing and quite dependent on the male partner, while men are seen to be aggressive, arrogant, dominant and independent. (Lombroso, 1998) Cesare Lombroso, one of the earliest theorists of female criminality based his theory purely on a strict biological point of view. Lombroso stated “females are less inclined to commit crimes because women are more conservative, they are less exposed to society since their duties are mainly in the household, which gives them less of an opportunity to commit crimes, and because their brains are less developed than males, which causes them to act more primitive.” (Lombroso, 1998) When a female commits a violent and brutal crime, it come’s as a shock to society because women are not expected to be criminals, and therefore they are labeled ‘mad not bad’ according to Lee Bryant, author of ‘Feminism and Crime’. Lee Bryant argues, “The perception that women may be ‘mad’ because they ‘dared to go against their natural biological givens such as ‘passivity’ and a ‘weakness of compliance’ ‘appears to originate from the view that women who conform as pure, obedient daughters, wives and mothers benefit society and men”. (Bryant, 2000) Lombroso’s theory looks at that characteristics of the offender and determines that the female......

Words: 857 - Pages: 4

Law Opinion

...Law Opinion Paper Cynthia Willison CJA224 November 8, 2010 Carl Schiff Law Opinion Paper “Lincoln once said that three things only make up a nation: its land, its people, and its laws,” (Gordon, 1991, p. 1), only after this statement it was then realized there were not many laws to speak of. As the nation started to develop and declared independence from the common law of medieval England, common law was enacted and then adapted to America’s needs. The public officials, legislators, enact the laws of bodies of rules then the law is enforced by the executive branch, which the law enforcement was required to respect and obey. To make sure the proposed laws are legitimate the judicial branch acts as mediator to evaluate the principles in the United States Constitution and other important American legal documents without prior court decree. This is why the framers of the Constitution decided to for the American government to have a system of checks and balances because no one branch can act alone, so all three branches collaborate; therefore the power of each branch is balanced (Meyer & Grant, 2003). The separation of powers was formulated by the framers of the Constitution to share the same power as checks and balances. Each state law-making system is developed with a similar structure of the government; however with dissimilar law-making traditions. Although some states the state legislature congregates per annum discussing law-making whereas state legislatures...

Words: 1063 - Pages: 5

Gun Laws

...Why New Illinois Concealed Carry Gun Law Increases Public Safety By Matt MacBradaigh New Illinois Concealed Carry Gun Law Increases Public Safety. Gun politics as usual, antigun politicians like Gov. Pat Quinn say new law endangers public safety. But that is exactly contrary to the academic research on the matter. When Illinois passed a law to allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed handguns, it became the last state in the union to do so. Illinois previously allowed no handguns outside the home, but the courts ruled this violated the Second Amendment, and gave the state legislature until July 9 to change their law before the old was repealed. In the land that made the phrase “Chicago politics” infamous, the stakes – and grandstanding – were high. A version of the bill was originally sent on to Governor Pat Quinn, who threatened veto and sent the bill back with suggested changes. The changes were all but ignored and the legislature passed the bill with a two-thirds majority anyway. Governor Quinn called the vote “extremely disappointing,” saying it “will lead to tragedy” and that “public safety should never be compromised or negotiated away.” He accused the legislature of “surrender[ing] to the National Rifle Association.” But who’s playing politics? Does Gov Quinn have a point, or is he patently wrong? Based on academic research from criminologists, Governor Quinn is wrong. His suppositions of what endangers people run exactly contrary to research. There is no reason......

Words: 1074 - Pages: 5

Gun Laws

...Why New Illinois Concealed Carry Gun Law Increases Public Safety By Matt MacBradaigh New Illinois Concealed Carry Gun Law Increases Public Safety. Gun politics as usual, antigun politicians like Gov. Pat Quinn say new law endangers public safety. But that is exactly contrary to the academic research on the matter. When Illinois passed a law to allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed handguns, it became the last state in the union to do so. Illinois previously allowed no handguns outside the home, but the courts ruled this violated the Second Amendment, and gave the state legislature until July 9 to change their law before the old was repealed. In the land that made the phrase “Chicago politics” infamous, the stakes – and grandstanding – were high. A version of the bill was originally sent on to Governor Pat Quinn, who threatened veto and sent the bill back with suggested changes. The changes were all but ignored and the legislature passed the bill with a two-thirds majority anyway. Governor Quinn called the vote “extremely disappointing,” saying it “will lead to tragedy” and that “public safety should never be compromised or negotiated away.” He accused the legislature of “surrender[ing] to the National Rifle Association.” But who’s playing politics? Does Gov Quinn have a point, or is he patently wrong? Based on academic research from criminologists, Governor Quinn is wrong. His suppositions of what endangers people run exactly contrary to......

Words: 1074 - Pages: 5

Public Law

...constitutional law is often described as the fundamental law of the land, its main objective is to determine and allocate functions and powers among various organs of the government. The constitution also defines the relation between governing authorities and the common man. The UK has always run on the basis of an unwritten constitution, which basically means that all the rules and regulations governing the fundamental state as well as the basic rights of the people are not codified in one single document known as the ‘constitution’. Unlike many other super powers around the world, Britain has never had the need to consolidate the building blocks of its land due to its relatively stable political development over time. Apart from the documentation of parliamentary laws and to a certain extent, judicial decisions, the unwritten constitution is mainly derived from traditions, precedents, and customs. Moreover, the conventions responsible for these laws are governed by obligations and obedience. These traits only emerge over time and consequently exert great significance to common law, allowing judges to make constitutional judgments without the overshadowing of a written text on what is right or wrong. Instead, they are able to draw on general rules emerging from traditional practices and precedents. As an unwritten constitution, the UK constitution is highly flexible and can easily evolve and adapt to changing times. Modern times necessitate the changing of laws in order......

Words: 908 - Pages: 4

Doctrine of Law

...Critically analyse the strengths and weaknesses of precedent and statutory interpretation in the UK’s legal systems The doctrine of precedent arises (stare decisis) from the common law implementation in UK courts. This goes back to King’s Henri II (the King’s Bench) whereby past decisions were dispensed throughout the kingdom. The reasons and main advantages of the same are to ensure consistency/uniformity and predictability, thus creating confidence in the legal system. The stare decisis (stand by what is decided) enacts the requirement on the courts to follow/abide by the previous rationes decidendi of previous cases. Mainly, the lower courts will abide by precedent decisions due to the hierarchy invested therein (Binding precedent). In 1966, the House of Lords (now known as UK Supreme Court) referred to the doctrine of precedent as “…an indispensable foundation upon which to decide the law and its application to individual cases. It provides at least some degree of certainty upon which individuals can rely in the conduct of their affairs, as well as a basis for the orderly development of legal rules”. However, the House of Lords advised that: “…that too rigid adherence to precedent may lead to injustice in a particular case and also unduly restrict the proper development of the law. They propose, therefore, to modify their present practice and, while treating former decisions of this House as normally binding, to depart from a previous decision when it appears...

Words: 1253 - Pages: 6

Libya and My Abiding Faith

...Libya and My Abiding Faith Libya sits directly between Tunisia and Egypt -– two nations where changes of regime has taken place recently through its own’s pople complicated effort.  For more than four decades, the Libyan people have been ruled by a tyrant -– Muammar Qaddafi.  He has denied his people freedom, exploited their wealth, murdered opponents at home and abroad, and terrorized innocent people around the world. Last month, Qaddafi’s grip of fear appeared to give way to the promise of freedom.  In cities and towns across the country, Libyans took to the streets to claim their basic human rights.  As one Libyan said to an international mass media, “For the first time we finally have hope that our nightmare of 40 years will soon be over.” In the face of the world’s condemnation, Qaddafi chose to escalate his attacks, launching a military campaign against the Libyan people.  Innocent people were targeted for killing. Hospitals and ambulances were attacked.  Journalists were arrested and sexually assaulted.  Supplies of food and fuel were choked off.  Water for hundreds of thousands of people in Misurata was shut off.  All of these brutal things cannot be hidden from the unprecedented development of technology development. Confronted by this brutal repression and a looming humanitarian crisis,  European allies declared their willingness to commit resources to stop the killing.  And so United Nations Security Council has passed historic resolution that authorized a......

Words: 510 - Pages: 3

Laws and Regulations

...Legal and regulatory: Today businesses have many laws that they must abide by to stay in compliance with the government. Abiding by these rules allows flexibility and adaptability of law and other legal rules governing the business. Global: Many companies do business globally to branch out to larger markets. Businesses that operate globally must consider all aspects of competition that may affect the external trends of the business. Economic: Economic factors affect the external trends of business because a company has to plan how to spend money and how it would benefit the company. Technological: Technology is important in strategic planning because this allows an organization to reinvent the business and stay in the loop with the rest of the competition. Social: Social factors are extremely important with planning. Placing the right organization in the right place with the right products can help with the success of the business. Environmental: The environment where a business is located is important to a business because the community and a business must coincide collectively to allow success of the organization. Resources: Resources in all aspects are important to the planning of an organization. A good human resources department is important to getting the right people into the organization. Goals: Goals are important to strategic planning because it allows the business to set them and give them a timeline to attain these things. This is beneficial to the......

Words: 352 - Pages: 2

Defending the Defenseless

...1   Defending the Defenseless During the American Revolution, slavery was in the process of being abolished in Europe and in the Northern states of America. Even though parts of the world were willing to free slaves, the Southern states found ways to defend slavery. In Paul Finkelman’s book Defending Slavery: Proslavery Thought in the Old South, Finkelman provides the writings of many white leaders from the South who believed that slavery was essential to America’s society. The white leaders who spoke about proslavery included a broad range of defenses to justify themselves because they wanted Americans to believe that slavery had a lasting impact economically, religiously, legally, and racially. One of the defenders in Finkelman’s book was Thomas R.R. Cobb. He justified slavery by arguing the effects of abolition in the United States. Cobb said, “The emancipated negroes do not enjoy full and equal civil and political rights in any State in the union, except the State of Vermont” (Finkelman, 79). He was convinced that those who became free of slavery did not live a better life. He believed that any African American slave who is free is not capable of living successfully and “His moral condition compares unfavorably with that of the slave of the South” (Finkleman, 79). This argument states that African Americans who are enslaved are in better hands with the slave owners and therefore they should remain as slaves. Cobb’s defense was justifiable because he...

Words: 1323 - Pages: 6