Cause and Effect of US Gun Policies: Fourth Amendment Analysis Essay

This essay provides an in-depth analysis of the cause and effect of gun policies in the United States, specifically focusing on the Second and Fourth Amendments to the US Constitution. It examines how the Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms for self-defense, while the Fourth Amendment addresses the right to privacy and protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. The essay explores the tensions between these amendments, particularly in the context of law enforcement practices like no-knock policies and the challenges of balancing individual rights with public safety. It discusses key court cases such as United States v. Miller (1939) and John Quinn v. Texas (2014), highlighting the concepts of the exclusionary rule and probable cause. The study concludes by suggesting the need for clearer guidelines and modifications to the Fourth Amendment to ensure that gun rights do not threaten officers due to the extended rights given by fourth amendments. The essay draws on academic journals and online resources to support its arguments.

Expository Essay or
organization method essay

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
AIM .................................................................................................................................................3
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ...........................................................................................................3
DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................................3
CONCLUSION ...............................................................................................................................4
REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................................5

INTRODUCTION
The constitution of United states provides the right to its citizens to bear ad keep the arms
for their safety purpose. The right is protected by second amendment (Amendment II) on gun
policies so that self defence rights of citizens can be protected (Spitzer, 2017). The essay will
discuss the cause and effect of gun policies by constitutional amendments.
AIM
To analyse the cause and effect of Americans guns rights by the fourth amendment
among states.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
 To evaluate the American guns rights
 To study the key rights provided by fourth amendments
 To analyse the cause and effect of guns rights by fourth amendments
DISCUSSION
Amendment II of US constitution provides the legislations for the gun rights. In United
States v. Miller (1939) it was held that right to arms is a part of common defence thus citizens
cannot be discarded from having these rights (Kerr, 2016). However, the gun rights of American
citizens are repeatedly question and are assumed to have some loopholes which violates the
Amendment IV of constitution. The Amendment IV states that people have right to be secure
against unreasonable or unjustified seizures or searches.
Thus, it extends and emphasis on right to privacy and freedom of individuals. Since every
US citizen has right to own and use guns in self protection, police officers are also required to
cope up with the effects of second amendment. For example while investigating the cases of drug
abused individuals or people who own firearm it can be dangerous for the police to directly deal.
Thus, it is quite common practice for the police officers to follow a no-knock policy so that
suspect cannot get a chance to use fire weapons. However, Amendment IV protects the privacy
rights and unnecessary searching (Thueson, 2017). Thus, it limits the actions of police because
no-knock policy is violation of rights provided by fourth amendment.
Criminals as and others suspects are using Amendment IV as basis of claim that with no-
knock and searching operations without permission police is violating their privacy. It has been
argued that if permission are used then there is high possibility that the individuals will get time

to clean up the evidences. Along with this it can also put the lives of police officers in danger
because suspect can easily claim that they were tortured with unreasonable searches and in self
defence they have used their gun rights.
The same was observed in case John Quinn v. Texas. (2014) in which John Quinn was
suspected in dealing drugs and owned firearms which was danger for the law enforcement. And
thus to deal with this effect Amendment IV rights of privacy and unjustified searching were
violated. Thus, Amendment IV limits the searching and seizing rights of police. Many
government officials including cops and military are arguing that these amendments are against
the safety and protection of officers and are hurdle in accomplishing their duties. However,
police is allowed to search without permission of owner but courts must be informed.
Contrary to this the supporters of these rights claim that since police and cops have been
given huge authority there are numerous events when police shoot the individuals on the basis of
suspect or in self defence. The uninformed searches and seizers by police enhances the
occurrence of conflicts and battles between civilians. In such cases gun rights are heavily
exploited and actions of police are justified. Thus, in order to establish more control over gun
rights provided to police officers Amendment IV were imposed. It assures that the gun rights
used by the police are for the state welfare and evident not on the basis of doubt ( No, you don’t
have an absolute right to own guns, 2015).
The two key concepts of Amendment IV are exclusionary rule and probable cause.
These concepts enable that evidences collected without warrant cannot be used and people must
be protected from unnecessary searches. It leads to increasing challenges for the cops to present
evidences against suspect. The gun rights also gives increasing opportunities and benefits to
individuals so that they can protect themselves with the help of firearms. Hence, it can be
concluded that gun rights and Amendment IV must be reviewed so that state security is not
threatened by loopholes of any amendments or rights (Ferguson, 2016).
CONCLUSION
It can be concluded from the study that the fourth amendment needs to have more clear
guidelines and modifications so that American guns right does not create a harm or threat to
officers due to the extended rights given by fourth amendments.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Ferguson, A.G., (2016). The Smart Fourth Amendment. Cornell L. Rev. 102. p.547.
Kerr, O.S., (2016). The effect of legislation on Fourth Amendment protection. Mich. L. Rev. 115.
p.1117.
Spitzer, R.J., (2017). Gun law history in the United States and Second Amendment rights. Law &
Contemp. Probs.. 80. p.55.
Thueson, S.D., (2017). Fourth Amendment Search-Fuzz Shades of Gray: The New Bright-Line
Rule in Determining When the Use of Technology Constitutes a Search-Kyllo v. United
States, 121 S. Ct. 2038 (2001). Wyoming Law Review. 2(1). pp.169-202.
Online
John Quinn v. Texas. 2014 [Online]. Accessed through <https://www.gunowners.com/abramski-
us/8-general/17-quinn>
No, you don’t have an absolute right to own guns. 2015. [Online]. Accessed through
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/07/no-you-dont-have-an-
absolute-right-to-own-guns/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1680817c3724>