...The Second Amendment The second amendment is one of the best known amendments to the Constitution. It 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.” History of the Second Amendment In early American colonial times, the right to carry a weapon was carried on by the early English colonists who needed arms to defend their property and the families from the Native Americans. Even if there had been an army, it would have taken too long for it to arrive in the event of trouble. Standing armies were very unpopular to the colonists because many of them had experienced standing armies in their native lands that ended up ruling over the people. Instead of having standing armies, the colonists would train together for the purpose of local defense. The local groups were called militia and are somewhat equivalent to the National Guard today. During the Revolutionary era, the British recognized that the colonists would use their weapons to defend themselves so they made an effort to confiscate the weapons of the local militia. This confiscation instigated the battles of Lexington and Concord which were the first battles of the revolution which erupted when the British were trying to capture weapons and ammunition stores at Concord. When the revolutionary War ended, and the Americans were making their new Constitution, they were very aware of the need for self-defense...
Words: 728 - Pages: 3
...statute prohibiting keeping a handgun in the home was a violation of the second amendment. The Court decided that yes, this statute was unconstitutional with Scalia writing the majority opinion and Stevens writing the dissent. In his opinion, Scalia wrote that the right to bear arms was a protected individual right. I would like to argue that of the two Stevens has the better interpretation of the second amendment because It looks at the amendment as a whole rather than focusing on one part and ignoring the other. His decision can be rooted in his philosophy of interpretation, Textualism. With Textualism, the judge interpreted statutes based on their...
Words: 885 - Pages: 4
...His defense was the Stand Your Ground Law. Which is a law that authorizes a person to protect and defend one's own life and limb against threat or perceived threat using deadly force if necessary. After all of the facts were presented at trial to disclaim George Zimmerman defense, he was acquitted of all charges against him proving the Stand Your Ground Law is bias. I believe the Stand Your Ground is biased, because the interpretation of the law could have different meanings. Unfortunately, this law has allowed murders to walk free without being prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Through the history of gun control, the meaning of Stand Your Ground Law, and the controversy topic of Stand Your Ground law would help enlighten others on how biased the law has become over the...
Words: 656 - Pages: 3
...The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, ratified in 1791, has been the subject of passionate debate and interpretation since its beginning. Ensuring the right to bear arms, its original intention, subsequent evolution, contemporary relevance, and potential for modification have been central to discussions on individual liberties, public safety, and governmental authority. This paper delves into the framers' intent behind the Second Amendment, its incorporation and evolution over time, its significance in modern society, and the prospects for amendment. The framers of the Constitution created the Second Amendment with the intention of safeguarding individual liberties and ensuring the security of the newly formed nation. The...
Words: 1077 - Pages: 5
...everyone else's. Worldviews are formed by many things: religion, personal opinions, social influences, and so on. People's worldviews also differ between various topics; one such topic being the Second Amendment of the Constitution. There is a sizeable disagreement in the United States today about the interpretation and meaning of the Second Amendment, which reads as follows: "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." (LII / Legal Information Institute). Regarding...
Words: 699 - Pages: 3
...the weapons that are causing violence in our society? The Second Amendment to the Constitution, which concerns the right to bear arms, is always a major, debated issue. Gun rights and gun control groups have been lobbying Congress for decades to change legislation in their respective favors. Both in 2008 and in 2010, the gun issue has reached the nation’s highest court. In the 2008 Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller the court ruled that the Constitution protects an individual’s right to own a gun for personal use. But the 5-4 decision only applied to federal laws but not local and state laws. A major key case to gun debate was in 1939, United States v. Jack Miller 307 U.S. 174. In this case, the Supreme Court was asked whether the Second Amendment protected Miller's right not to register a "sawed off" shotgun, despite a federal law requiring it. The Supreme Court examined the original records of Congress to determine why the Second Amendment was written into the Constitution. The Supreme Court then ruled that Miller's shotgun was not for a militia-type purpose and that it therefore was not protected by the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court further explained that at the time the Second Amendment was adopted, Congress favored using the civilian population (adult males) as the State Militia for national defense rather than building an army of professional soldiers. The purpose of the Second Amendment was to support the national defense. Therefore, the only...
Words: 1026 - Pages: 5
...The Founding Fathers of the U.S. Constitution May 25, 1787, the founding fathers with 55 delegates from 12 states in attendance, created the United States Constitution in order to establish the foundation that would govern our country for future generations. However, it should be noted that when the U.S. Constitution was developed, it was understood that it was likely going to require modifications to maintain applicability in an ever changing world. The founding fathers' foresight led to Article V of the U.S. Constitution, which details the steps for processing changes to the Constitution (The Constitutional Convention, 32). Article V of the U.S. Constitution specifies that there are two formal ways to amend the constitution. The first requires a two-thirds vote by both the House of Representatives and the Senate. The alternative method for amending the Constitution requires no less than 34 States calling for a convention to come together and re-write the legislation. A current event is the confederate flag in South Carolina that is being called to be taken down by Gov. Nikki Haley. This is a prime example of three fourths congressional vote for the law to be passed that has been being fought for many years, but still no conclusion to the votes (Fieldstadt). In years past, there have been proposals to take down the confederate flag, but because there hasn’t been a majority rule, the law hasn’t changed. Situations have led up to dissatisfied communities, like the young man...
Words: 1219 - Pages: 5
...during the convention meetings. The delegates made sure to keep everything a secret, anyone who was not a delegate were not allowed to attend any meetings. We have no written documents because they kept everything a secret of what had occurred during the meetings. The only details we have today is from a notebook that belonged to James Madison. However, James Madison is known as the “Father of the Constitution.” He had also helped write the federalist papers. At the Constitutional Convention James Madison had done a very good job. When the delegates had to decided to write the “Bill of Rights” he was against it. James Madison was afraid that the future people would just go by those ten amendments that were listed in the “Bill of Rights”. James Madison had believed in a loose interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. The Virginia Plan was one of the two opposing plans for the government. This plan basically was an outline of the federal government we have today. The Virginia plan was called for three branches of government. The three branches of government are the...
Words: 2520 - Pages: 11
...District of Columbia. He felt that his 2nd amendment rights were being violated and sued the District of Columbia. This then went to the District court where Heller lost and then the case went to the Court of Appeals where Heller won, and then went to the highest court possible the Supreme Court. Throughout the battle the 2nd amendment is interpreted in many ways, more specifically the term “right to bear arms” and the actual meaning behind is the main controversy through this Supreme Court Case. The trial ended up taking about 4 months and Heller eventually won the case....
Words: 604 - Pages: 3
...Persuasive Research Paper Dominique Harris ENG/215 September 30, 2013 Bill Morgan Persuasive Research Paper Restrictions on Guns for the Sake of Life Volsky (2012), "I support the Second Amendment” (para. 2) Governor Rick Scott (R) stated December 2012 when questioned by anchor Soledad O’Brien about which reforms, if any, he would support. Gun control is one of the leading controversial issues society faces in America to date. The government is faced with the issue of limiting assault rifles with a trite and establishing tougher gun laws vs. the second amendment. President Obama said it best “the country’s background check system for gun buyers is so weak it makes the United States vulnerable to mass shootings” (Rucker, 2013, para. 2). That statement alone should end any controversy on the issue of gun control. Regulating individual’s right to bear arms certainly would bring a since of safety to our society. In order for that to happen, government will have to do more than just prohibited sales of guns. In everyone’s community someone knows an individual who owns gun e.g., for protection or hunting. To regulate the rights to bear arms authorities would have to confiscate everyone’s guns to make America safer. I personally would like that to happen because guns kill, accidentally and on purpose. Take a look at the bigger picture “every day in the U.S., an average of 289 people are shot. Eight-six of them die: 30 are murdered, 53 kill themselves, two die accidentally...
Words: 1640 - Pages: 7
...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 to the United States Constitution provides the citizens a means of protection against the unjust excesses of government.[2] The Framers placed this guarantee in the Bill of Rights because they considered the right to keep and bear arms peculiarly important and also uniquely vulnerable to infringement. The Amendment's command protects individuals against even popular conceptions of the public good. In addition to this protection within the United States Constitution,[3] the constitutions of forty-three states guarantee the right to keep and bear arms.[4] Despite the constitutional authority for this right, legislators and judges have consistently attempted to devalue it. Methods such as giving misleading labels to select firearms like "assault weapons"[5] or "Saturday Night Specials"[6] have been used to justify incremental disarmament.[7] American jurisprudence has deliberately devalued the right to keep and bear arms by disingenuously interpreting the right so as to effect a gradual change in American culture. To this end, for example, the Seventh Circuit has already upheld a civilian handgun ban by dismissing an historical analysis of the Constitution: "The debate surrounding the adoption of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments ... has no relevance on the resolution of the...
Words: 7782 - Pages: 32
...The Second Amendment For many years there has been an ongoing debate over the Second Amendment and how it should be interpreted. The issue that is being debated is whether our government has the right to regulate guns. The answer of who has which rights lies within how one interprets the Second Amendment. With this being the case, one must also think about what circumstances the Framers were under when this Amendment was written. There are two major sides to this debate, one being the collective side, which feels that the right was given for collective purposes only. This side is in favor of having stricter gun control laws, as they feel that by having stricter laws the number of crimes that are being committed with guns will be reduced and thus save lives. However while gun control laws may decrease criminals" access to guns, the same laws restricts gun owning citizens who abide by the law; these citizens make up a great majority of the opposing side of this argument. These people argue that the law was made with the individual citizens in mind. This group believes that the Amendment should be interpreted to guarantee citizens free access to firearms. One major group that is in strong opposition of stricter gun control laws is the National Rifle Association (NRA). The NRA argues that having stricter gun control laws will only hinder law-abiding citizens. The final outcome on this debate will mainly depend on how this Amendment is going to be interpreted. The Second Amendment...
Words: 2267 - Pages: 10
...Should There be Another Constitutional Convention? The Articles of Confederation was he first federal “constitution” to be upheld in the thirteen colonies. Unfortunately, under the Articles, Congress was given no power over the states so that the country could grow into an actual functioning society, though there were certain things that they did have control over, such as create war and peace time, conduct foreign affairs and etc. But under the Articles, “But Congress could not collect taxes and enforce laws directly; it had to rely on the states to provide money and enforce its laws. . .”(Dye 61). Essentially, the states did what they felt was right beneath their own respective state level government. “No respect is paid to the federal authority. Not a single state complies with the requisitions[submitted by Congress]” (Nardo 18). The Founding Fathers were disturbed by the utter discord the nation seemed to be in. Deciding that enough was enough in May of 1797, twelve of the thirteen colonies delegates, 55 delegates, gathered together in the State House of Philadelphia to, originally, fix and tweak the bugs out of the Articles of Confederation. But instead of fixing the Articles, James Madison decided that it would be better to scrap the whole document and create a whole new federal constitution. James Madison was intent on drafting a new constitution that would create a stronger, central government: The Virginia Plan. “. . . he by no means wanted that government to be so...
Words: 2073 - Pages: 9
...organization is constituted. Within states, a constitution defines the principles upon which the state is based, the procedure in which laws are made and by whom. Some constitutions, especially codified constitutions, also act as limiters of state power, by establishing lines which a state's rulers cannot cross, such as fundamental rights. An example is the constitution of the United States of America. George Washington at Constitutional Conventionof 1787 signing of the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution of India is the longest written constitution of any sovereign country in the world,[2] containing 444 articles in 22 parts,[3][4] 12 schedules and 118 amendments, with 117,369 words in its English-language translation,[5] while the United States Constitution is the shortest written constitution, at 7 articles and 27 amendments.[6] Constitution of the Philippines From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Constitution of the Philippines Created October 15, 1986 Ratified February 2, 1987 Location Legislative Archives of the House of Representatives,...
Words: 16003 - Pages: 65
...The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United 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 has been the subject of controversy only for roughly the last 80 years. Even though, as some argue, the Framers themselves argued over its wording, the almost universally accepted opinion was that it guaranteed an individual right. It was in 1934 that the first attempt at universal gun control on a national level occurred. In 1934, the United States was at the height of the Great Depression (Kangas, 1997). In 1933, the 18th Amendment to the Constitution had finally been repealed, marking the end of the noble experiment known as “prohibition”. The fourteen years of prohibition had nurtured an atmosphere of speakeasies, bootlegging, gangsters, and mafia. The year following the repeal of prohibition was marred by some of the worst gangster violence in American history. John Dillinger and Baby Face Nelson were on the run. Bonnie and Clyde were killed in that year (1934 in the United States, 2013). The nation had just finished its war with Al Capone’s gang (Al Capone, 2013). The people were tired of the unrestrained violence and, in an apparent classic effort to obtain safety at the expense of liberty, were willing to accept limits on the right to bear arms. Although this discussion is not about the history of gun control but about the right to bear arms...
Words: 2488 - Pages: 10
