Ethno Political Violence Cause and Effect

Ethno Political Violence Cause and Effect The development of ethnopolitical situations usually depends on crises in political and/or economical spheres. Laurie Nathan considers violence as one of the most significant symptoms of crises, which happen within one state and may spread over the others, and admits that four structural conditions become crucial for both economical and political crises (Nathan 1).Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Ethno Political Violence Cause and Effect specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More After I read the article The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, I clear up that the collaboration of structural, political, and economical forces have a certain contribution to ethnopolitical violence. First of all, such structural conditions like authoritarian rule and minorities’ exclusion from state governance may serve as a strong reason of violence and intra-state crisis. When oppressed minorities cannot accept the existed rules and conditio ns, they have to live under, they prefer to develop rebellions and prove their points of view by means of power and fights. Cultural identity and physical security are under a threat because of human demands and the ways, people demonstrate these demands. Laurie Nathan also underlines that weak states, which are not able to cope with and solve political and social conflicts, and the ideas of inequity and deprivation play an important role in the development of ethnopolitical violence and becomes an important cause of the crises. For many people, it turns out to be very difficult to distinguish the symptoms and the causes of political and economical crises; this is why it is better the article by Laurie Nathan is rather helpful for drawing insights about the political and economical factors of a crisis and violence. Ethnopolitical violence is one of the brightest symptoms of a crisis, and structural conditions of the state are the cause for violence and for crisis.Advertising Looking for essay on social sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Peter Uvin tells that human fear is based on the development of the community they live in. The vast majority of people are not ready for the imposition of foreign policy because of lack of knowledge about strategic interests, and they make numerous attempts to separate from each other and find more powers to fight against the violence that comes from the other groups (Uvin 234). In spite of the fact that both authors do not pay enough attention to gender role in the development of crises, they both admit that this point is still crucial and deserves thorough analyses in future. These two readings under consideration help to comprehend that in order to create good governance, it is crucially important to follow certain conditions and rules. It is necessary to realize that crises cannot be overcome within a short period of time and by means of warfare only . Peaceful strategies, political stability, proper analysis of causes and symptoms of state crisis and violence, and desire to achieve peace between all parts of society – these are the major points, which have to be taken into account by those, who aim at solving economical and political problems and establishing peace and understanding between people. In case the analysis of causes and symptoms of violence and crisis takes place, proper idea of how to overcome crises and improve situation will be offered. Ethnopolitical conflicts as well as violence and crises may take various forms. Sometimes, these forms are hard to recognize, and analytics have to work out the programs, which are aimed at analyzing, solving, and preventing crises in both political and economical spheres. Nathan, Laurie. â€Å"The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse: The Structural Cause of Violence in Africa.† Track Two 10.2 (Aug. 2001). 15 Nov. 2009. Web.Advertising We will write a custom es say sample on Ethno Political Violence Cause and Effect specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Uvin, Peter. Aiding Violence: The Development Enterprise in Rwanda. West Hartford, Connecticut: Kumarian Press, 1998.

History of the Second Amendment

History of the Second Amendment After going virtually unchallenged for more than 100 years, the right of Americans to own guns has developed as one of today’s hottest political issues. The central question remains: does the Second Amendment apply to individual citizens? Gun Rights Before the Constitution Though still British subjects, colonial Americans considered the right to bear arms as necessary for fulfilling their natural right to defend themselves and their property. In the midst of the American Revolution, the rights that would later be expressed in the Second Amendment were being explicitly included in early state constitutions. The Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776, for example, stated that â€Å"the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state.† 1791: The Second Amendment Is Ratified The ink had hardly dried on the ratification papers before a political movement was undertaken to amend the Constitution to declare gun ownership as a specific right. A select committee assembled to review amendments proposed by James Madison authored the language that would become the Second Amendment to the Constitution: â€Å"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.† Prior to ratification, Madison had hinted at the need for the amendment. Writing in Federalist No. 46, he contrasted the proposed American federal government to European kingdoms, which he criticized as being â€Å"afraid to trust the people with arms.† Madison went on to assure Americans that they would never need to fear their government as they had the British Crown, because the Constitution would ensure them â€Å"the advantage of being armed.†Ã‚   1822: Bliss v. Commonwealth Brings 'Individual Right' Into Question The Second Amendment’s intent for individual Americans first came into question in 1822  in Bliss v. Commonwealth. The court case arose in Kentucky after a man was indicted for carrying a sword concealed in a cane. He was convicted and fined $100. Bliss appealed the conviction, citing a provision in the commonwealth’s constitution that stated, â€Å"The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state, shall not be questioned.† In a majority vote with just one judge dissenting, the court overturned the conviction against Bliss and ruled the law unconstitutional and void. 1856: Dred Scott v. Sandford Upholds Individual Right The Second Amendment as an individual right was affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in its Dred Scott v. Sandford  decision in 1856. The nation’s highest court opined on the intent of the Second Amendment for the first time with the rights of slaves in question, writing that affording slaves the full rights of American citizenship would include the right â€Å"to keep and carry arms wherever they went.† 1871: NRA Is Founded The National Rifle Association was founded by a pair of Union soldiers in 1871, not as a political lobby but in  an effort to promote the shooting of rifles. The organization would grow to become the face of Americas pro-gun lobby in the 20th century. 1934: National Firearms Act Brings About First Major Gun Control The first major effort to eliminate private ownership of firearms came with the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA). A direct response to the rise of gangster violence in general and the St. Valentine’s Day massacre in particular, the NFA sought to circumvent the Second Amendment by controlling firearms through a tax excise- $200 for each gun sale. The NFA targeted fully automatic weapons, short-barreled shotguns and rifles, pen and cane guns, and other firearms defined as â€Å"gangster weapons.† 1938: Federal Firearms Act Requires Licensure ofDealers The Federal Firearms Act of 1938 required that  anyone selling or shipping firearms must be licensed through the U.S. Department of Commerce. The Federal Firearms License  (FFL) stipulated that guns could not be sold to persons convicted of certain crimes. It required that sellers log the names and addresses of anyone to whom they sold guns. 1968: Gun Control Act Ushers in New Regulations Thirty years after America’s first sweeping reform of gun laws, the assassination of President John F. Kennedy helped usher in new federal legislation with wide-ranging implications. The Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibited mail-order sales of rifles and shotguns. It increased license requirements for sellers and broadened the list of persons prohibited from owning a firearm to include convicted felons, drug users, and the mentally incompetent. 1994: TheBrady Act and Assault Weapons Ban Two federal laws passed by a Democrat-controlled Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton in 1994 became the hallmark of gun control efforts in  the later 20th century. The first, the Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act, required a five-day waiting period and background check for the sale of handguns. It also mandated creation of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. The Brady Act had been spurred by the shooting of press secretary James Brady during John Hinckley Jr.s attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan on March 30, 1981. Brady survived but was left partially paralyzed as a result of his wounds. In 1998, the Department of Justice reported that the presale background checks had blocked an estimated 69,000 illegal handgun sales during 1997, the first year the Brady Act was fully enforced.   The second law, the Assault Weapons Ban- officially titled the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act- banned a number of rifles defined as â€Å"assault weapons,† including many semiautomatic and  military-style rifles, such as the AK-47 and SKS. 2004: The Assault Weapons Ban Sunsets A Republican-controlled Congress refused to pass the reauthorization of the Assault Weapons Ban in 2004, allowing it to expire. Gun control supporters criticized President George W. Bush for not actively pressuring Congress to renew the ban, while gun rights advocates criticized him for indicating that he would sign a reauthorization if Congress passed it. 2008: D.C. v. HellerIs a Major Setback for Gun Control Gun rights proponents were thrilled in 2008 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment extends gun ownership rights to individuals. The decision affirmed an earlier decision by a lower appeals court and struck down handgun bans in Washington D.C. as unconstitutional. The Court ruled that the District of Columbia’s total ban on handguns in the home was unconstitutional because the ban was contrary to the Second Amendment’s purpose of self-defense- an intent of the amendment never before acknowledged by the Court. The case was lauded as the first Supreme Court case to affirm the right of an individual to keep and bear arms in accordance with the Second Amendment. The ruling applied only to federal enclaves, however, such as the District of Columbia. Justices did not weigh in on the Second Amendment’s application to the states. Writing in the Courts majority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that the â€Å"people† protected by the Second Amendment are the same â€Å"people† protected by the First and Fourth Amendments. â€Å"The Constitution was written to be understood by the voters; its words and phrases were used in their normal and ordinary as distinguished from technical meaning.†Ã‚   2010: Gun Owners Win Another Victory in McDonald v. Chicago Gun rights supporters won their second major Supreme Court victory in 2010 when the high court affirmed an individuals right to own guns in McDonald v. Chicago. The ruling was an inevitable follow-up to D.C. v. Heller and  marked the first time that the Supreme Court ruled that the provisions of the Second Amendment extend to the states. The ruling overturned an earlier decision by a lower court in a legal challenge to Chicago’s ordinance banning the possession of handguns by its citizens. 2013: Obama's Proposals Fail Federally but Gain State Traction After the shooting of 20 first-graders in Newtown, Connecticut, and 12 people in an Aurora, Colorado, moviehouse, President Barack Obama proposed stricter gun-control laws. His plan required background checks for all gun sales, called for the reinstatement and strengthening of the assault weapons ban, limited ammunition magazines to 10 rounds, and included other measures. While these proposals did not succeed at the national level, a number of individual states began to tighten their laws accordingly. 2017: Proposed Gun Control Law Stall The Background Check Completion Act was introduced on Oct. 5, 2017, less than a week after the deadly Oct. 1 mass shooting in Las Vegas. The Background Check Completion Act would close a current loophole in the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act that allows gun sales to proceed if a background check is not completed after 72 hours, even if the gun buyer is not legally allowed to purchase a gun. The bill has stalled in Congress. 2018: Parkland School Shooting Sparks a National Student Movement and State Legislation On Feb. 14, a school shooting at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, killed 17 people and injured 17 others. This was the deadliest high school shooting in U.S. history. Student survivors created the activist group Never Again MSD and organized momentous nationwide protests and walkouts by students. As of July 2018, just five months after the Florida shooting, the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence counts 55 new gun-control laws passing in 26 states.  Notably, this has included laws passed in Republican-held state legislatures.