IndexTopic 1Argument 2Argument 3RebuttalShould We Keep Arms? I think we should keep guns for protection. If we didn't have guns, how would we protect ourselves if someone broke into your house, they would have a gun and what would you have? Nothing. So the point is yes, we should keep them because if we didn't have them we would be an easy target for others. Taking away guns won't stop people from committing suicide, not everyone uses a gun. You should always be armed because you never know what can happen. A knife wouldn't help you because you have to get close to them and you don't know what they are capable of. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get Original EssayTopic 1We need guns, there are so many stalkers and molesters coming for women and men. Furthermore, having gun control laws will not stop criminals from breaking the laws. This quote states: “The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads: '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.' what he's basically saying is that it's a free state and the people have the right to it and that's taking the 2nd amendment away from us. Argument 2 While many so-called experts claim that gun violence is at an all-time high, the fact of the matter is. On the contrary, since the 1990s gun violence has declined and, in fact, between 1993 and 2000, the rate of gun homicides dropped by nearly half, from 7.0 homicides to 3.8 homicides per 100,000 people. Since then, the gun homicide rate has remained relatively stable. From 2009 to 2014, the most recent year for which data is available, the number of gun homicides hovered between 11,000 and 12,000 per year. In contrast, a significantly higher – and growing – number of gun deaths have occurred by suicide than by homicide, and this has been true for the past two decades. Take Chicago for example, they have the strictest gun laws in the country but have the highest gun violence of any city in America and you may wonder why and the answer is simple, when you make laws that prevent law abiding citizens from owning a gun to protect themselves and their families, only put guns in the hands of criminals because law abiding citizens follow the laws and not criminals, which is why we have guns in the first place, to protect ourselves from criminalsTopic 3On the question of debate on the second amendment there is really no debate, the Constitution is quite clear. Legally, debates often boil down to the Second Amendment, whose 18th-century context and language have been endlessly analyzed and debated: “A well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and unsheathing your weapons will not be violated.” Gun rights advocates say it means an individual right to own guns, while gun control advocates say it means a collective right of the people, through a militia, yet the fact is the Second Amendment has never had nothing to do with hunting because back when the constitution was formed if you didn't hunt you didn't eat and as far as a militia goes, we, the people, are the real militia, not the national guard. The National Guard answers to the governor of the state because it cannot be a militia of the people for the people. For generations, the Supreme Court has avoided answering the question directly, even though its decisions have often been seen as favoring collective interpretation. But in 2008, the Supreme Court.