nd little remaining threat from wild animals; the government is stable and elected by a democratic process and the citizens of the country have the most powerful armed force ever assembled by humankind in addition to several levels of law enforcement that protect it. Rather than being a means of protecting society, the right to own guns has become a detriment to the safety of society which is in opposition to the intentions of the Founders. As this discussion will show, ‘the right to bear arms’ is no longer a necessary protection in the modern world.
Gun control generally works toward legislating and controlling the distribution of the weapon that kills the most people, handguns. Most gun control advocates are willing to compromise on the ownership of rifles and shotguns if handguns could be made illegal, thus statistically reducing the number of gun-related deaths occurring in this country per year. In this way, the right to bear arms is protected based upon the spirit of the Founding Fathers and so are the thousands of usually urban dwellers that die from handguns every year. Of course, it must be acknowledged that when reading the Second Amendment in context, only armed militias have the right to keep and bear arms. However, given the current strong emotions tied to the issue and the popularity of guns in this country, a compromise is the only solution. Individuals on both sides of the issue must learn to recognize that ideologies concerning guns and their possession are formed by a person’s innermost beliefs, cultivated by years of thought and shaped by life’s numerous experiences and family cultural context. An ideological debate causes a more emotive response in individuals than does any other. Political ideologies can never die and in politically turbulent times, such as these, are very much alive. The 9/11 attacks, abortion debate, the war in Iraq, the loss of civil liberties, global warming, health care, gay marriage, stem cell research