The basic premise of the constitution is to allow people to the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Someone else cannot take one's right to life. However there are times when people try. When that time comes, the victim must have a way to protect himself. A handgun carried concealed is a great way to offer that protection What gun control advocates can't perceive is that gun control laws are aimed at the legal buying and selling of guns. What person who plans on using a gun for illegal purposes would go through the legal process of having the gun registered to them? Not too many. Most guns obtained by criminals are not obtained through the lawful purchase and sell transaction. The government is aware of this. All the gun control laws are not about preventing crime. Law abiding citizens who are armed will prevent crime. You can hire all the police you want. They do not stop crime while it is happening. Armed citizens can stop the crime before it ever even happens. How many times have you read about someone walking into a public place and opening fire? Sometimes the person even stops and reloads. What would you do if you were there? Hide and wait to be shot? Or would you hope that someone else is armed? After all, one-armed citizen could stop the shooting! Criminals don't wait for you to call the police! Why should you have to wait on the police to come to your rescue? Don't you have the right to defend your own life? Does the constitution offer protection for private individuals choosing to own guns? Yes it does. If we look at the 2nd amendment we would see that it has more than one meaning. It means that both a well-regulated militia and the right of individuals to own guns are protected. The argument from the gun-control advocate side of this paper does not recognize the second part of the second amendment. Specifically the part that says the "right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.