“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.” These words have become forgotten as individuals, former member of the U.S. Supreme Court John Paul Stevens, attempt to strip away the individual aspect of the second amendment. Gun control is not effective as it has not been shown to actually reduce the number of gun-related crimes. However, if more Americans were to purchase a gun, be trained to use the gun, and carry the gun, gun violence would begin to decrease.
The second amendment was incorporated under the fourteenth in the landmark case McDonald v. Chicago. According to The Fourteenth amendment, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” Prior to this the city of Chicago had infringed upon the rights of Otis McDonald by making gun registration required and by making handguns illegal. McDonald’s house had been broken into five times. He had legally owned shotguns but felt that the shots were to wild, to be fried in the home. Consequently, McDonald, a law abiding citizen, was unable to purchase a hand gun to protect himself in the home, infringing upon the castle law, to defend themselves against an intruder, free from legal responsibility/prosecution for the consequences of the force used. This court case set a standard that states must abide by the second amendment, furthering the law abiding citizen’s right to carry a firearm and defend themselves.
Washington D.C. was believed by many to be the American ideal until the controversial Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 that forced citizens to have guns unloaded, disassembled, or locked up. It ...
... middle of paper ...
...ol: Update." Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 17 Dec. 2012. Web. 13 Feb. 2014. .
House Of Representatives. Committee On Ways And Means, Hearing, April 16, 18, And May 14, 15, And 16, 1934 (H.R. 9066). Congressional Library
Levy, Leonard (1970). Fourteenth Amendment and the Bill of Rights: The Incorporation Theory (American Constitutional and Legal History Series). Da Capo Press. ISBN 0-306-70029-8.
McDonald v. Chicago. Supreme Court of the United States. 28 June 2010. Print.
"The Second Amendment Goes to Court." eHistory @ The Ohio State University. February 2008. 14 Feb 2014, 09:18 http://ehistory.osu.edu/osu/origins/timeline.cfm?articleid=7
"Supreme Court Hearing." Supreme.gov. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Feb. 2014. .
U.S. Const., am.II
U.S. Const., am.XIV
Lately, Gun control has been one of the most talked about topics in the nation. It is a very sensitive and controversial topic due to gun crime. These new restrictions not only affect people who oppose firearms, but especially the people who depend on it for protection.The right to bear arms is the peoples right to bear arms for their own defense. These are also the “political writings” of John Locke and many others.The concept of the “Right to bear arms” was derived from the Bill of Rights in 1689 which says: That the Subjects which are Protestants may have Arms for their Defence suitable to their Conditions and as allowed by Law. Citizens have a right to bear arms gun control laws will not prevent gun violence Death by gun rates were lower before gun control was out into effect.
Story, J. (1987). Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. Durham, N.C.: Carolina Academic Press.
"United States: Gun Ownership and the Supreme Court." Second Amendment. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Mar. 2014.
Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (U.S. June 4, 1928). Cornell University Law School;
Throughout the past decade or so the Second Amendment rights issues have arisen with the demand of individuals rights to keep and bear arms. The constitution states the “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.” In the court case upheld in the Supreme Court Columbia vs. Heller, the ongoing debate of this interpretation of the Second Amendment. Heller, a special officer in Washington D.C., was denied the right to being able to register a handgun to keep at home. This case was taken up to the Supreme Court due to Heller’s argument stating that the government of the nation’s capital must obey the Constitution and the Bill of Rights because these texts are the supreme law of the land. Heller’s belief of injunction was certain, “at least one of the founding fathers said that there will be times when the State or Federal Government will overstep its bounds and will need to be put back into its place.” There has not been any lower court cases or any true precedent case besides Columbia vs. Heller for Drake vs. Jerejian. Drake vs. Jerejian seeks an end to the unjustified denial of carry permits by the State of New Jersey; and the unreasonable restriction for concealed carry permits citing “justifiable need” or “urgent necessity” for the issuance of a permit. Constitutional rights are protected under the law and may not be denied by government officials because of perceived “need” or “necessity.” The Second Amendment should not only guarantee this right to possess firearms to members of militia but also to those who may grant this privilege, as well that it’s a right in our constitution. An individual’s Second Amendment right should se...
The Second Amendment is often misinterpreted because of the wording; people believe it only applies to the military or militia. The Second Amendment reads; “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.” On June 26th, 2008, the Supreme Court established, in the case District of Columbia v. Heller, that citizens are the militia and the Second Amendment is an individual right. McDonald v. Chicago, set the precedent that the amendment covers every state and locality—not just federal enclaves (Levy 1). The Second Amendment has two clauses, the Operative Clause and the Prefatory Clause. The Operative Clause is the actual protected right and the Prefatory Clause is t...
This debate has produced two familiar interpretations of the Second Amendment. Advocates of stricter gun control laws have tended to stress that the amendment’s militia clause guarantees nothing to the individual and that it only protects the states’ rights to be able to maintain organized military units. These people argue that the Second Amendment was merely used to place the states’ organized military forces beyond the federal government’s power to be able to disarm them. This would guarantee that the states would always have sufficient force at their command to abolish federal restraints on their rights and to resist by arms if necessary. T...
The debate over the right to bear arms according to the Second Amendment has been a hotly contested issue for many years in American history. The matter has been one of the most controversial issues in the second half of the twentieth century and into the twenty-first; disputed between politicians on the liberal and conservative side along with issues such as abortion, capital punishment, and gay marriage. The Supreme Court has officially defined the controversial Second Amendment by stating that states have the right to maintain a militia separate from a federally controlled army (Gale Encyclopedia, pg. 155-162). However, “Courts have consistently held that the state and federal governments may lawfully regulate the sale, transfer, receipt, possession, and use of certain categories of firearms, as well as mandate who may and may not own a gun (Gale Encyclopedia, pg. 155-162).” Therefore, the issue is one that is extremely hard to clarify. Which side is right?
People have been debating the meaning of the Second Amendment since its ratification on December 15, 1791. One side feels that the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution to protect collective rights as seen in ”United States v. Miller,” while the opposing side feels that it was meant to protect individual
In 2008, the Supreme Court decided in the case of, District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects a civilian’s right to keep a handgun in his home for the reason of self-defense. In Chicago the case of McDonald v. Chicago the court decided the due process clause of the 14th Amendment limits the power of the city of Chicago to ban the possession of handguns by private citizens. In my opinion both decisions misinterpreted the amendment completely.
Guns, Crime, and Freedom states that, no gun law which restricts the right of law-abiding citizens to own guns has been proven to reduce crime or homicides, not even the Brady Law and the “Clinton Crime Bill.” These two laws st...
As violence and murder rates escalate in America so does the issue of gun control. The consequence of this tragedy births volatile political discourse about gun control and the Second Amendment. The crux of the question is what the founding fathers meant when they wrote, “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.” Since the writing of the Second Amendment the make and model of firearms has changed dramatically and so has the philosophies of the people. A rifle is no longer defined as a single shot, muzzle-loading musket used to primarily protect families or solely for food. Should the weapons we use today be protected by an amendment written nearly 222 years ago? Should the second amendment be rewritten? Does the Second Amendment apply to individual citizens? These questions spark extensive debates in Washington D.C. regarding what the founding fathers intended the amendment to be. The answer to this question lies in the fact that despite hundreds of gun control articles having been written , still the gun control issue remains unresolved. History tells us gun control debates will be in a stalemate until our judicial system defines or rewrites the Second Amend. This paper will examine the history of the Second Amendment, and attempt to define the framers intent, gun control legislation and look at factors that affect Americans on this specific issue...
Spaeth, Harold J. and Edward Conrad Smith. The Constitution of the United States, 13th ed. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1991 (paper). ISBN 0064671054.
The second amendment states “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The Founding Fathers included this in the Bill of Rights because they feared the Federal Government might oppress the population if the people did not have the means to defend themselves as a nation or individuals.
A series of cases will be presented in this paper to provide a clear idea of the First Amendment. Cases that have cause an impact in society and have changed or modify a law.