To Justice Scalia, this means that the individual has “the right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation” (Scalia, 4). The question at stake, however, is not whether the individual or collective is protected but the scope of the right in question. In other words, while it is clear that the amendment protects the right to use guns for military services but does not protect its use for crimes, what rights does it encompass in between those extremities, such as the right to carry a weapon for personal self-defense? A more natural reading of the amendment, where the prefactory clause is read chronologically before the operative clause, shows the text’s intent to solely protect the rights of militia. This is proven, as pointed out in the dissent, by the fact that states such as Virginia and Pennsylvania explicitly articulated in their Declaration of Rights at the time the separate right of individuals to bear arms for self-defense.
America has the right to bear arms and to keep her gun 's, but something needs to be changed when it comes to gun laws. Guns are not the problem, it 's the gun laws that are the issue. Gun laws are weak, there has been more shootings than ever before. And there 's no unity to create a solution. We begin with how most gun control arguments begin with.
There are laws to protect and make it legal by obtaining a license in the state in which an individuals is purchasing a gun but that do not stop the black market. Gun control laws and violence with in different states is a clear view that the gun control laws/bans are not really helpful in today’s society. I feel that the law did not abolish the black market of gun purchases therefore people are still purchasing guns illegally for what the state ban in the first place. Now for those individuals who have no criminal background and obtain a gun for recreational purposes (hunting or protection/depends on state laws) within that state then it is
The 2nd amendment is “The right to bear arms”. The people are granted the right to own a firearm and the government cannot take the right. The government cannot take the right provided to the people of United States from the constitution. If the federal government keeps trying to get more power over things it will step over powers of national government stated in the constitution. The constitution stated the powers given to the state and national government.
The Second Amendment was intended for the maintenance of state militias, not the right of individuals. Michael Waldman, the President of the New York University School of Law, said that when the amendment was in progress, the US Supreme Court declined to rule for the individual right four times between 1876 and 1939. Waldman overall indicated that individual rights were not what was referred to in the Second Amendment for an extended period. According to Jeffrey Toobin, a news editor for a famous New York magazine company, the re-interpretation of the Second Amendment was an “elaborately executed political operation,” in the government. This medium that although they amend the amendment every once in awhile, the intent will always remain the same.
The Second Amendment provides: “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” (US Const. amend II). The right of the people to keep and bear Arms should not be contravened, if militia is well regulated. However, how can someone tell what is a well regulated Militia? There are many countries in the world where forbid people from using or wield arm, and those countries national security is ensured just as well as it is in the United States or even more ensured than it is in here.
Owning a gun is not a bad thing, in fact, it is a right that every American should have access to. It 's written within the constitution right next to our freedom of speech. So it is not unreasonable for Americans to expect to not be troubled when someone wants to buy one. However, America 's gun problem does not stem from simply wanting to own a gun. The true issue is the type of firearms Americans have access to.
The second amendment has been under the microscope for quite some time know. Determining the meaning, gun control supporters misinterpret the amendment and believe that the amendment should protect the states right to bear their own military. However, the correct interpretation is the right of an individual to bear arms. Gun control supporters are trying to take this freedom away, because there scared of gun. Guns aren’t dangerous, people are dangerous.
The second amendment in the United States Constitution gives the right of the people to keep and bear arms which means the people of the United States have the right to have guns and use them. The argument on on gun control is not logical as the second amendment states that the people of the United states have the right to bear arms. Although you can lose your second amendment rights by convicting a misdemeanor involving domestic violence, the government can not take away guns unless another amendment is added to the constitution to abolish the 2nd amendment. In the constitution no amendments can be removed but another amendment can be added to ratify that amendment such as the ban of liquor. After the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting fear struck the nation.
The amendment is referencing the freedom of people to form military groups and own guns, not just everyday men. The Second Amendment 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.” During this time period (around 1776), militias (meaning people who formed groups to protect themselves and their homes) were used because of the country’s lack of an organized military (“The Second Amendment”). In today’s society, America has several branches of defense, including the Army, Air Force, Navy, the police, and more. There is simply no reason for civilians to form militias when they have so many organizations to defend them. As previously stated, this amendment refers to the right of the people to form groups and have guns in order for a democracy to truly work.
Gun Control "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." As Thomas Jefferson stated, this right of citizens is a way of self defense. This has been a right of the people in America for centuries, why should this right be taken away now? Enforcing of this law could increase attacks, restrict good citizens, and take away a means of defense from the people.
When he made his most definitive statement about not taking away people’s guns during the 2008 campaign, Obama added that “there are some common-sense gun safety laws that I believe in.”” . LaPierre maintains that background checks are equivalent to gun bans and gun confiscation. According to “The Australia Gun Control Fallacy” by Varad Mehta Australia doesn’t have a bill of rights, so their legislators have more say for their individual rights than ours. “Australians have no constitutional right to bear arms, so seizing their weapons did not violate their constitutional rights. Gun confiscation in the United States would require violating not only the Second Amendment, but the fourth and
During Early America, our Founding Fathers declared that each man in America is entitled to a set of rights to protect themselves and from the government. The 1st and 2nd amendments guarantee each American is entitled to The Right to Bear Arms by “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." I 've come here before today to ask you here today if you feel you are in danger of the gov’t. I 've got a proposition for you young Americans; if you are in danger of the gov’t and are obliged to fall into submission of their so called corrupt ways stand up and make a difference and stand for a new change in the American way of life. On an average