The Second Amendment is a frequently debated topic in today’s society. 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.” The Second Amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791 when the Bill of Rights were passed. The Amendment was easily accepted because of the majority consensus that the government should not have the ability to take weapons away from people. In many countries, corrupt governments use armed soldiers and other arms to control and oppress people. This amendment was introduced by James Madison. The most likely reason this amendment was made was to defend the American people from tyrannous rulers; for example,
The Second Amendment protects one of America 's most controversial freedoms: the right to bear arms. It is controversial because not everyone agrees that people should have the right to bear arms. They think that if the wrong person is carrying a gun something bad can happen, but when you are carrying a gun you have the right to your own protection and it is probably for the best to be able to carry a gun in case something bad happens. It’s a right in the bills because everyone has the right to carry their own form of protection and for some people that is a firearm. Some people also use it for getting food when hunting.
The second amendment of the Bill of Rights stipulates that the United States shall have a well-regulated militia. Reasoning for this is that as a free state, a well-regulated militia is necessary for the security amongst the citizens. The second amendment also provides that the people have the right to keep and bear arms. It is expressly specified that the latter right shall not be infringed.
The second amendment begins with “ A well regulated militia...”. In 2010, the Supreme Court extended the law to private citizens not in a militia but, in this same case, they also stated that gun-regulations are well-within the boundaries of the 2nd amendment. Although many oppose gun control due to the amendment, the Supreme Court has openly stated support. Americans will often say that they support specific gun control measures such as background checks (85% agreed), bans on assault-style weapons, bans on high-capacity ammunition clips along with online sales of ammunations, lastly federal databases to track gun sales. These measures aren’t sent in place due to the ideology of the right to bear arms, the regulations aren’t taking away guns. They are simply making it difficult for guns to land into the wrong
The debate on the Second Amendment, and many cases have been reviewed by the Supreme Court to determine what exactly it means. 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.” The debate is over what the Second Amendment means when it says “the right of the people to keep and bear arms”. Those in favor of gun control believe that putting more restrictions on guns will make America safer and reduce the number of deaths in our country. They claim that the Amendment protects the right to arming a militia, which we now call the National Guard, but nothing beyond that. Those opposed to gun control believe that restricting guns will make our country more dangerous because countries with higher gun control have
In the United States of America, the First Amendment right is one of the most important, allowing us to our freedom of speech. The Second Amendment is the second most important, allowing the citizens to have the right to bare arms to defend themselves, their family, and their country against any threat. This amendment gives us the right to have power for ourselves for protection, hunting, and sport. Due to the recent gun violence in America, some people view guns as a horrid object and want to revise the second amendment. Here I will show the truth about gun control with both sides of view and their respective opinions. Also, this paper will provide facts between the races and the genders of gun violence from white and black
The Second Amendment protects the right of people to keep and bear arms. This amendment was a controversial among different people in the government. It was between letting the people keep their weapons or to not let the people keep their weapons. This amendment was important to the framers of the Constitution because it provided the country with a well-regulated militia. 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." Some reasons why this amendment was made are that the framers wanted adults to know how to use a weapon and to be ready to use a weapon if they were attacked. During this time, the British troops were still attempting to overtake the new land, one of the ways they did this was by attempting to take the people’s guns. There was still reason to believe that British would still attack the new country and the United States did not have a real army, so any military action needed to be responded to by
The right to bear arms has been a controversial issue ever since James Madison established it as the second amendment of the constitution. 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” (US Const. amend. II). Those in favor of the second amendment, believe that arms are used for protection, dangerous situations, and sports. 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 gives citizens of the United States right to own weapons. “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.” (United States Constitution - Bill of Rights - Amendment II ). The District of Columbia law bans gun possession by making it a crime to carry an unregistered
The Second Amendment grants U.S citizens the right to bare arms, but it was written in a very different time: there was no police protection, and were no automatic weapons available.”- Is it time to pass tough gun control laws? By McClathy Tribune. People often refer to the Second Amendment when the argument of gun control laws as an excuse to prevent these changes because they believe their right to self-dense with a weapon is a form of government taking over. “There’s also the slippery slope argument. It preys on people’s fears that the government will turn into a dictatorship or completely ban guns…The Founders of our country wanted the people to be able to protect themselves from over powerful governments.” - Is it time to pass tough gun control laws? By McClathy Tribune. People might think their rights are being taken but in reality we are making the U.S a safer place for all our citizens. “They say that since Congress stopped banning assault rifles in 2004, violent crime in America has fallen significantly, and shootings are also down slightly.” There are positive consequences for having new gun control laws and the safety of the citizens increases with each new law. Those positive consequences are not enough to convince everyone that we need improved gun control
When asked what the second amendment is, one would normally answer “the right to bear arms”, which is true. This right is guaranteed to U.S. Citizens under our Constitution. Due to recent events and circumstances, this freedom and right that has been granted is now threatened by those who feel that it is too “dangerous” to protect yourself. Being that I myself nor any of my family owns a firearm, one might speculate that we do not feel the need for protection. However, that is quite the contrary. Even though we do not have any firearms in our household or on our property, my family and I wholeheartedly support the second amendment and the right we are given by the U.S. Constitution. My father
Guns. It is a topic that the Supreme Court hasn’t dealt with since Heller v. District of Columbia in 2008, and they have not looked poised to take it on anytime soon. However, a new case has found it’s way into the 9th Circuit: Peruta v. San Diego County. Due to the duration of time between Heller and Peruta the courts have been forced to rule on Second Amendment cases without the guidance of the Supreme Court. Peruta is now forcing the courts to begin examining the Second Amendment again and looking into what rights American citizens are given from it. This case has risen several questions that concerned citizens want the court to finally answer: What will happen to gun rights around the country if the case is ruled in favor of
The Second Amendment was never actually intended for everyday citizens. In the writing of the amendment it states militia meaning that it was only intended for them to bear arms. Citizens have found easy access to the weapons that they use in their shootings. Therefore, guns are put into the wrong hands, which means gun regulations should be stricter and allow a more detailed background check with mental health evaluations.
Paul Barrett wrote about a discussion whether or not we should amend the second amendment. He used the words from a retired supreme court justice Paul Stevens to help justify the points on why we should amend it. The main points that came out are that the 2nd amendment was made for militias or the military to bear arms and didn’t let the federal government regulate weapons but only left it to the state governments. The right to bear arms is essentially not an unlimited one. As the country grows older the interpretation of the 2nd amendment changes as well. With all this being said I felt like Barrett relies too much on the words of the retired justice member. It would have been better if he would have opened up his article to numerous justice members or other federal judges. However, Barrett helps bring in one of the major points why people feel and argue the reason the 2nd amendment should be amended.
The founding fathers recognized that along with the First Amendment and the freedom of speech it affords citizens, the right to bear arms should be next. It’s what affords citizens the ultimate ability to preserve the constitution and what we naturally value most, our safety and that of our families. I believe that self-defence by extension is a natural part of the Second Amendment. As statistics indicate, responsible firearm use lowers crime rates and saves lives daily. Without the the Second Amendment, citizens would be without the basic tools needed to protect themselves, their family, and property. The legal use of firearms is the constant factor that holds violent criminals in check. If law abiding citizens did not have the tools necessary to prevent criminals them from committing terrible acts, criminals would be more open and bold in their actions. Self-defense through the Second Amendment, along with its original intent to defend the populace from a tyrannical government, are an important deterrent against crime and tyranny for every citizen of the United