Birdsong's Law Blog

Birdsong wishes to share with you a well written  directed research paper by student Daniel Burgess.  Mr. Burgess is a strong advocate of the Second Amendment to the Constitution and opposes gun control.  His paper analyzes the early foundations of gun control laws in the U.S.  He submits that more citizens with guns would mean less crime. It is his basic thesis that the Second Amendment right of U.S. citizens to bear arms is a enumerated individual right.  Mr.  Burgess makes some cogent arguments concerning gun control  and self defense.  He has given Birdsong his permission to share his  thoughts and arguments with a wider world. Take a gander.

If You Want to Stop the Crime, Let Me Have What’s Mine:

America’s Crime Rates and Our Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Daniel W. Burgess, Jr.

July 27, 2009

 I.                   Introduction

This paper addresses the issues of crime and gun control. There is an ongoing debate about whether gun control is the problem or the solution. Proponents of gun control seek to strip the people of their constitutional right to keep and bear arms under the veil of flagrant and idyllic responses to crime, claiming guns are the problem. The opponents of gun control fight for the very freedom which was granted to them by the founding fathers and enumerated in the Bill of Rights, arguing that more guns equals less crime. [1] The reality is that by taking a law abiding citizen’s means of self-protection, one is essentially arming the criminal and inviting crime into every peaceful household in America. Italian criminologist, Cesare Beccaria, summed it up perfectly by