Following the worst mass shooting in American history recently in Las Vegas, arguments are again being made by many for strengthening the gun laws of the country. The hope by those making the argument is that by strengthening the laws the chances of further mass killing incidents like ones that occurred in Las Vegas and other places will be reduced. Many others who are opposed to the further strengthening of gun laws generally argue that strengthening gun laws will not make Americans safer and would instead result in law-abiding citizens being less able to defend themselves against criminals who won’t care about the stricter gun laws. They also argue that it would violate rights given to the people by the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment of the constitution states: 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. The exact meaning of the Second Amendment, and to what extent it allows guns to be regulated, is disputed, but it is certainly worded very strongly in favor of generally allowing Americans to have access to guns. Even so, after so many mass shootings in the United States in recent years, many believe more can and should be done. To gain a greater understanding of the arguments on both sides of this issue, see the link in this module to the Issues a Controversies library database and read the two opposing viewpoints that are presented about whether the United States should adopt stronger gun control laws. Feel free to research other sources on the issue in addition to the assigned reading. After reading the opposing viewpoints, make your initial post by responding to EACH of the questions below: 1) With respect to the way the 2nd Amendment is worded, do you interpret it to mean the right of Americans to own guns is unrestricted or do you interpret it to mean the right is connected to particular circumstances? Explain your interpretation. 2) Supporters of stricter gun control laws argue that the ownership of military-style assault rifles like the ones used during the Las Vegas and other incidents to carry out mass killings should be banned because they are not necessary for personal protection or for hunting, and that their only purpose is to kill people in great numbers quickly. Do you agree or disagree that they should be banned? Explain your reasoning. 3) If you ARE in favor of stronger gun control laws, explain what regulations or restrictions you would like to see strengthened that would not violate the 2nd Amendment. If you ARE NOT in favor of stronger gun laws, explain what steps you believe, if any, should be taken to reduce the incidences of mass killings in American society.