The article I chose is about a Gun privacy case that the Supreme Court is debating whether"the government can withhold information on some gun purchases and crimes, including details of database checks like those used to track weapons in the sniper case". Bush and the National Rifle Associations believe if that by releasing this information to individuals, it will be invading people's privacy.
Whether this case wins or loses, the chances are that either way it would not prevent crime or control guns in the United States. Gun control is an action of the government to reduce crime. So many laws have passed and still there has been no effect. So whether the government releases the information from gun owners to individuals, it still would not be effective. Gun control has been an issue for years and there is no right or wrong answer. We as individuals should have a right to own and possess a gun to a certain instinct. For instance, the Brady Act, which stops criminals from purchasing guns. It should be only certain criminals because what if someone was convicted for drinking and driving, should he or she be able to own a gun? Yes, because if they do not purchase the gun correctly, they will find someone off the street who will sell them one illegally. It is better to have it done correctly, so there information can be put in the computer. While banning guns and releasing information from individuals will not prevent guns from society, it only takes more freedom from Americans. Guns do not kill people, people kill people.
In Chapter 12, it talks about whether the National Rifle Association is too powerful or influential? In my opinion, no, I agree that a person who owns a gun should not be held responsible for others who use guns unlawful. There will be a time that an individual will use a gun for self-defense, due to many crimes in the United States. These individuals should not have their guns taken …