Today, this amendment is extremely controversial and faces many different opinions, mostly by the two major parties.
If we think about it, back then, they <em />needed weapons. They were fighting a tyranny during the Revolutionary War and that's why the amendment also talks about a good militia, because that was the target of James Madison when he proposed the law.
However, different interpretations are made today. Some think that they should be able to carry guns wherever they go as a means of protection. Some think that that would look threatening - having a weapon in public. However, some's arguments are to look back at the document that gave our country its rights. If we look at everything that happens today- shootings, and things like that, it really creates a substantial argument against the right to bear arms. People dying because of the right of anybody over a certain age who wants to go in a store to buy a gun is unacceptable to some. If you've ever seen gun stores in major cities, that can pose a major threat to people who live around it. People argue that if we're advancing toward the future every single day, we should not hold onto past laws that endanger our people. Some claim the founding fathers knew better.
Whatever the case may be - whether the right to bear arms is beneficial or not, it's imperative that we find an effective solution to settle disagreements between American citizens who take opposite sides on this matter.
What distinguishes Jack Katz from other sociologists is that
most of the focus on the background of the individual as the maybe most
important factor that predisposes them to committing deviant acts. Instead Katz
argues that what the perpetrators experience while committing those acts can
help researchers better understand their actions. He shows this with the example of a young shoplifter who shoplifts not because he needs the thing he steels but because he likes the rush of the act itself.
