The Second Amendment says, “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.” Gun rights has become the subject of intense political, social, and cultural battles for much of the last century. The pro-gun right side has asserted that the right to arms was absolute, and that any gun control laws infringed that right (Kopel, 2013). This right has been supported by the Supreme Court who has reinforced what has become the American consensus that the Second Amendment allows the right to keep and bear arms, especially for self-defense, and that it is a fundamental individual
A loose interpretation of the 2nd Amendment looks mostly at the “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”part of the 2nd Amendment, this is usually seen from a pro-gun rights supporter as an all inclusive clause which covers an individual 's right to bear arms. In contrary to gun control supporters, they see the framers setting up the 2nd Amendment as a right for individuals to bear all arms, not only for militia use,but for personal use such as hunting or sport. And any regulation that will infringe upon someone bearing arms is a violation of what the constitution guarantees for them. Having guns is right they believe to have and the way they are used can be
According to www.debates.org, there are two sides to the issue and many opinions on gun safety. The side that wants gun restrictions say “ I see everybody keeps saying "2nd Amendment" this, "2nd Amendment" that. You're looking at something that was adopted in 1791. Ladies and gentlemen... we live in the 21st century, it should be about time that we do something about old rules.
One of the most controversial issues our nation faces today is gun control laws. This controversy has been created due to the different interpretations of the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution which states the right of citizens to bear arms; “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” (Cornell Law School). Anti-gun control laws believe that the amendment guarantees the right to bear any kind of firearms. On the other hand, we have does that believe that more controls laws should be implemented since the 2nd amendment was for the right of States to have an armed militia during wartime. Both sides have strong point, however, the safety of our children comes first, and a firearm means death in the wrong hands.
In contrast, Opponents believe that arms should have regulations because they cause violence, such as mass shootings and murder. Despite the differences on each side, the second amendment aids in the protection of all individual rights of the people to keep and bear arms for self defense when necessary. As a result, the definition of the right to bear arms has to be provided. The second amendment is quite a chicanery clause to understand, the first part of the clause stated “ a well-regulated militia.” “Well regulated…” was defined in the eighteenth century as properly but, not overly regulated (Roleff 69).
The purpose of the Second Amendment The way in which we conceive our laws regarding guns is based solely on one important document: The Bill of Rights. The focus of this paper shall be mainly on the second amendment and how it shapes gun laws. This document will become a very important issue of the argument for less gun-controlling laws and to prove how the government is straying away from the original amendment set forth by the founding fathers of the United States.
Since the begining of America, the Founding Fathers wrote the strong-standing Bill of Rights with amendments to protect the country that had just recently won their freedom, but one amendment has been the top theme of controversies for centuries. Gun laws offend the Bill of Rights in so many ways and they prove ineffective. Gun Laws are relevant due to thousands of deaths and self-protection. The argument goes on but without guns there is militia, one of the main intents of the Second Amendment. These simple rules can reduce deaths, proven by millions of influential people.
According to the Second Amendment, “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 Second Amendment specifically states that “the right of the people to keep
In contrast, Opponents believe that arms should have regulations because they cause violence, such as mass shootings and murder. Despite the differences on each side, the second amendment aids in the protection of all individual rights of the people to keep and bear arms for self-defense when necessary. As a result, the definition of the right to bear arms has to be provided. The second amendment is quite a chicanery clause to understand, the first part of the clause states “ a well-regulated militia.” “Well regulated…” was defined in the eighteenth century, as properly but not overly regulated (Roleff 69).
The Second Amendment is very important amendment. There are many different positions on the second amendment. My position on the amendment is that I think you should be able to own a gun with having experience with shooting that gun. Having said so many people think that guns are dangerous and should be banned. But in all reality guns are not the problem because in Chicago the have very strict gun control but yet have the most crime rate in America right now.
Throughout history, especially recently, the question of whether gun control violates the 2nd Amendment has been a question which many people claim they know the answer to, but it may not be that transparent. I believe gun control is constitutional, and it deters crime and makes society safer, meaning I side with the pro-gun control ideas. Within the topic of gun control, there are many factors in which people must take into consideration when proposing an answer such as whether it deters crime, what the economic impact is, and what should be changed. NEW PARAGRAPH... Gun control can date way back, but what really made it controversial was the court case of Heller vs DC in 2008.
However, there's too much freedom in regards to gun control. The second amendment clearly states that the need for arms is only necessary in case of a militia to form. We as a country are no longer in the need of a militia since we are not in the wild west (constitution amend 2). Another valid argument that if we were ever in a deficit of soldiers we would draft them like it happened in the Vietnam war. The second amendment says that we have the right to bear arms, but it never specifies their intentions.
With it being a bit of a riddle, there are some rules that have been unclear that have been taken up to the supreme court. “Second Amendment Definition, Examples, Cases” talks about some of the cases. On the case Miller vs Texas they say, “In 1894, another ruling came about in Miller v Texas. This case involved an argument by a man named Franklin Miller that his right to carry a concealed firearm was granted by the Second Amendment regardless of any state laws. The court disagreed with Miller, stating that the Amendment did not pertain to state laws.”
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right of the individual to keep and bear firearms. When the Second Amendment was written it was for the right to arm oneself as a personal liberty to deter undemocratic or oppressive governing bodies from forming and to repel impending invasions. Furthermore, gun advocates proclaim that guns are for the right to self-defense. Some people try to participate and uphold the law. We have seen how guns in the hands of children can cause fatal accidents and people have committed mindless crimes leading to
The second amendment of the constitution, the right to bear arms is a heated subject for everyone across the world right now. Many people believe that taking away gun rights is “Not American” and goes against everything we are about, here in the land of the free. Many can argue also that it’s not the guns that kill people, it’s the people. It is unfair to take away something from everyone when only certain people shouldn’t be using them, because they aren’t mature enough to handle weapons. To begin with, many people believe that guns should be taken away because of all the shootings and dangerous events going on all around the world.