Matt Les age M. Jenson Eng. 101 BP #2 11/30 April 18, 1775 the British marched down the streets of Lexington, in pursuit to disarm the American Colonists. Little did the British know, the colonists were prepared for this act. This is where the famous line ” The British are coming. The British are coming comes.” Originates from.
The colonists gathered at the Lexington Green with their loaded muskets waiting for the British to arrive. “Disperse you villains – lay down your arms!” demanded the British when they arrived. The colonists refused to give up their arms, because they knew that if they didn’t have weapons they would be defenseless to the Britain’s (Firearms and Freedom).
This event is known as the start of the Revolutionary War. If the colonists had given up their weapons we would probably not be living in America today.
Now our government wants to take our guns away and people support this. The government should not disarm the society because criminals could take over the society, history has proven that the government will try to get total power over the people, and it would be against our constitutional right. If the government took away our arms with gun control criminals could easily take over the society. They would control the gun industry in the black market.
The Essay on British Colonists In America
During the 17th and increasingly in the 18th century, British colonists charged Great Britain with violating the ideals of rule of law, self government, and the equality of rights. Though this may be true to some extent, the colonists themselves violated those very ideals in their treatment of others. When one considers the harsh treatment of blacks, Native Americans, and even the poorer classes ...
You would not be able to find a gun legally, so criminals might start a new industry (Unarmed and Dangerous).
If criminals rule the industry then other criminals are going to have access to the arms. This would put innocent people in danger because criminals would have arms and innocent people would have no good means of defense: “False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that for bi the carrying of arms are laws of such nature…
Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; … (Firearms and Freedom) ” This is saying that taking away guns would be like taking away fire because it burns. I also expresses that taking away guns would be good for criminals and bad for the innocent civilians. Not only would criminals take over the society with petty crime, organize crime would start to take place. During the time of the prohibition of alcohol is when a lot of organized crime started to happen.
The same thing would happen if the government started gun control. With organized crime there would be a lot of deaths, including a lot of innocent people. Taking away the arms of the society would cause a lot of trouble and much more crime would occur. History has proven that every time that when government has attempted to take away the arms of the society they have attempted to take full power from the people. When the British tried to over take the colonized Americans the first thing that they did was ordered them to turn their arms. When Hitler was trying to take over the Jews and minorities he took away all of their arms, this way it would be much easier to over take them.
Hitler would not have to worry about his militia being wounded. Many times history has repeated itself and this is not something that we would want to be repeated. Not only would people over take the society, but also it is against our constitutional right to take away our arms. The Second Amendment secures an individual right to keep and bear arms (Firearms and Freedom).
The Essay on An Argument Against Gun Control
... criminal gun-ownership is higher, criminal gun ownership is also higher; and where criminal gun ownership is higher, the percent of crimes ... guns. For this reason, guns should not be limited by the government. Essentially, the issue of gun ... Peter. Gun Culture Or Gun Control?: Firearms and Violence: Safety and Society. Routledge, 2002. ... armed victim,” while 40% said they decided not to commit a crime ...
No one can change the constitution and in order to take away arms with gun control, the government would have to re-write the constitution. Government can’t take away our arms just like they can’t take away our freedom of religion.
This would be an uncivil act by the government and this is why the government can’t take away our arms. It is our right to bear arms in the United States of America and if the government took away our arms all hell would break loose. Criminals would take over the society with petty crime and organized crime. If history repeated itself then the government would make an attempt to have total control over the society. And it would be against our constitutional right.
The British tried to take away our guns the first time and we didn’t. Why would we surrender our guns to the government Works Cited Firearms and Freedom. Robert Lee. 28 Nov. 2000. 1 Dec.
2000 web Unarmed and Dangerous. Chicago Tribune. 18 Nov 2000. Charlton Heston.
Dec. 1 2000 web >.
