Is Openly Carrying Guns A Justifiable Act - Essay Example

The 2nd Amendment, which 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" gives people the liberty to arm themselves with weapons for their own self-defense. This right is respected by some states to the extent that people should expose the guns they are carrying, so long as they were legally acquired. One camp, such as that of Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) considers themselves responsible gun owners and claims that they do not use the gun until it is necessary.

They believe that the sight of guns is enough to dispel any untoward incidents by criminals. Because of this, so many people were enticed to buy guns for themselves. VCDL’s issuance of gun permits increased dramatically from 3,000 in 1994 to 180,000 in 2009. However, some people may not react positively to this since guns are very tempting to just use at one’s whim if that individual is impulsive. It may go off accidentally hurting even the owner, or someone within peripheral distance. If the gun carrier is prone to temperamental outbursts, then it is worse, since if he is provoked, then he has his gun to vent his temper with.

Responsible gun owners are aware of this and vehemently deny that they are that weak. They even advocate for the law of first investigating the background of whoever wants to buy a gun before releasing it to just anyone who may have the impulse to use it any which way he wants. This is where people call upon the 14th Amendment. It is clearly stated in Section one of this amendment that: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”.

This amendment, or Incorporation Doctrine, advocates the Bill of Rights to balance off whatever laws that may override the rights of others. In this case, the 2nd Amendment may give the right to people to “bear arms” however, it should also respect the rights of others who do not advocate gun ownership in the belief that it is not necessary. This conflict causes a huge confusion that may leave people divided, and the government, in a “fence-sitting” position. President Obama was known as the most anti-gun president.

NRA or National Rifle Association protested against him for gun control laws. Obama’s stand was that guns are harmful and should not be openly carried even if it is licensed in order to prevent it from firing at anyone, whether intentionally or not. The NRA organization claims that its members are responsible gun owners who are discerning about gun use and are against loosely selling firearms to just about anyone. Seven states have ruled that any gun manufactured in their state is exempt from gun control laws.

This implies no background checks, no age restrictions, no requirements for sellers to check out before releasing guns to buyers. This is their interpretation of the second amendment right. This ruling may be abused by some people who may claim that the gun they own was manufactured in that state, hence they do not have to go through thorough background check before being issued a permit. The federal government may also be suspected of concealing weapons so that these would be exempt from gun control laws because Obama has not done anything regarding NRA’s protest, and seems apathetic to the issue.

Personally, I am not in favor of the Open Carry gun policy of some states. I do respect their belief of