Challenges That Homeland Security Face - Speech or Presentation Example

? HOMELAND SECURITY ANALYSIS Homeland Security Analysis i). Purpose In a free secure it is the people’s right to keep and bearArms. However, it is difficult not to infringe this right since there are a lot of controversies surrounding the Second Amendment jurisprudence and gun control policy. The right of the people to bear arms was not a fundamental right for quite sometime. The law enforcement agencies were free to set any law regarding firearms as they wished. By the year 2009, there were about 20,000 existing fire arm laws in the Unite States of America (O'Connor 2010).  The second amendment advocates for a well regulated Militia. It further declares that the right of the militia to own fire arms should not be infringed. It may be indisputable that gun ownership makes a nation safe.  However, the access of the fire arms by criminals may however be uncontrollable.  It is also questionable if the presence of a gun may cause unnecessary harm such as an ordinary argument escalating into a shooting. There are legal issues legal issues/laws that highly conflict with the policy. ii). Background Currently, the Homeland Security is one of the largest federal agencies in the United States of America. The second amendment in the US constitution states that a well regulated militia, is necessary for the security of a free nation and that the citizens have the right to own firearms. Quite often, conflict arises about how the second amendment should be interpreted. Other issues also emerge from a possibility that fire arm ownership causes increased. There is difficulty in establishing a balance between ethical issues, individual's right of self-defense and national security. Each State in the US has fire arm laws clearly stated in their constitution. Most of the States have provisions for the right of an individual to own a firearm. The right to own firearms has been derived directly from the second amendment of the Unites States of America Constitution (William 1994). Most of the State constitutions give reasons for why an individual should be allowed to own firearms. Some these reasons are: a) Self-defense. Twenty four states give this as a valid reason for the use of arms b) State-defense Twenty eight states give this a proper purpose for gun use by individuals. c) Home/Property defense Ten states cite home/property defense as a reason for gun ownership. d) Family defense Five states advocate for this as a reason for gun ownership. e) Hunting and Recreation. Six states give this as another reason for fire arm ownership. The state constitutions do not permit confiscation of fire arms except for those used in crimes. iii). Discussion/analysis There is now written limit as to how many guns an individual can own. How many fire arms an individual can own is therefore an individual’s own business. For the sake of security, it is best that every home has access to a gun. Conflict arises from the need to have the public free of guns and the need to allow the public own guns. One can justify each position with the same point. Having guns with the people increases violent crimes and cases of murders by gunshots. On the other hand, ownership of guns increases safety within the public through reduced crimes as people are able to defend themselves. A number of legal issues do arise from the clause on gun/ firearm ownership cited in the second amendment of the constitution of the US. These legal issues are discussed below. a) Right to self defense All state constitutions allow gun ownership for reasons of self defense. Other than these, recreation activities such as target shooting and hunting are also reasons for firearm ownership. Allowing gun ownership is thus a fundamental step in ensuring personal safety among the citizens. Though there are cases of death reported as a result of gun use in self defense, they are significantly lower to cases of life saving as a result of gun use for self defense. The gun ownership clause thus aids in increased safety among the citizens. b) Security against tyranny and invasion From time to time, a country may face invasion from groups such as organized crime gangs. In such cases, having fire arms in the public can preserve the security by countering such attacks in good time. A few lives may be lost in the process, but the advantage of regaining safety supersedes this loss. In other instances, possession of firearms may come in handy when they are rebelling against the government. This right to wage a war against the government has not been openly admitted. Citizens’ efforts to resist oppression from the government are in many cases met by harsh measures meant to restore calm in the public. Identified perpetuators of such riots are prosecuted and punished for causing public unrest. The right to security against tyranny has not been granted to citizens in full. The argument given for this is that voting officials into public office is sufficient to keep the government in order. This is however not true as there are cases of government officials abusing power after they have been elected to office. In order to effect the right to a tyranny free nation, citizens should be free to wage a war on the government incase they are oppressed. It calls for tough measure in order to achieve liberty and use of firearms could be just it. In order to preserve freedom, people should be free to form militias. These groups come in handy in the protection of property life and liberty. This has been the case historically. c) Public health law The violation of the Public Health Law increases with availability of guns in the public. Effective gun safety laws need to be put in place to curb violent crimes. There is likeliness to commit suicides using firearms should these firearms be readily available to people with suicidal tendencies. Accidents involving children are also likely to cause deaths. There should be a measure to prevent access to guns by children. Though the risks to public safety caused by gun ownership are minimal, they should call for careful considerations. d) Right to a crime & violence free environment There is a huge relationship between gun ownership and crime and violence. There are as many lives lost by gun ownership as there are lives saved by gun ownership. There is difficulty in setting a difference between gunshots fired in the name of self defense and those fired while perpetuating a crime. There is also a chance of abusive use of weapons by persons of unstable minds. The second amendment did not also consider the technological advances that are likely to take place in the future. Firearms could be evolved in such a way that the harm caused could in no way be comparable to the present firearms. As such, there is need to have laws protecting citizens from such probable harm. There is also a need to have laws that stand the test of time or stay relevant no matter the age. Crime and violence has been and is still used as one of the major reasons for firearm confiscation. An individual can be unfairly robbed of their right gun ownership incase they fired a gun in self defense but was not able to prove this in the court of law. Criminals have in many cases framed law abiding citizens causing the citizens to lose control of their fire arms. To have this under control, ignorance of gun control laws should attract severe penalties. Though gun ownership is closely linked to crime, it can be handy as a self defense mechanism. In some instances, a mere display of the firearm may cause a criminal to give up on pursuing you. Gun ownership has played a role in reported homicides across the country. Studies have found that the rates of homicides occurring as a result of firearms are higher in developed countries. It is found that people that keep guns at home increases the likelihood of a homicide occurring. There is therefore need to establish very strict gun control laws in order to protect citizens from gun related crimes. The risk of homicides arising from gun ownership is however negligible compared to the advantages of property protection, life saving and crime prevention. The defensive gun uses thus override the risks associated with gun use. Confiscation of firearms should only be warranted incases of crimes and firearm abuse. The following cases however call for close monitoring: Suicidal firearm owners Guns are the most common mode of committing suicide. In the US, 53.7 % of reported suicides in the year 2003 were done using of firearms (Anderson 2004). This can however be controlled by ensuring guns are not available to such individuals. Presence of guns in rowdy neighborhoods. There are many cases of violence in rowdy neighborhoods. Measures should be put in place to ensure that firearm use in such areas is controlled. References Anderson, R. (2004). National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 52, No. 21. William Van Alstyne. (1994). The Second Amendment and the Personal Right to Arms. Retrieved on 17th November, 2011 from O'Connor, T. (2010). MegaLinks in Criminal Justice. Retrieved 17th November, 2011 from Read More