...tremendous controversy surrounding the Second Amendment. This, however, was not the intent of the Founding Fathers when they were formulating the United States Constitution in the 1700’s. When the framers convened to develop their governing document and infrastructure, they wanted to ensure the citizens would be free from governmental oppression, like that of the monarchy they had just escaped from. The Second Amendment writes, “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 Constitution of the United States of America”, Amendment II). The Revolutionary War was fought and won with the help of firearms, therefore, the inclusion...
Words: 573 - Pages: 3
...The Second Amendment For no reason shall the free citizen have to give up their rights to the Second Amendment. It was written for a reason and therefore the citizens of this country should abide by it. 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 might argue that only the regulated militia are to keep and bear arms, but to qualify for this all a person has to do be is a free citizen of this very country (The Second Amendment: Does the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution Guarantee an Individual Right to Bear Arms?). Any citizen of the United States should not be denied the right to the Second Amendment,...
Words: 945 - Pages: 4
...The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution Amendment II of the Unites States Constitution, commonly referred to as, “the right to bear arms”, is written 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.” This amendment was adopted along with 9 other amendments contained in the Bill of Rights, on December 15, 1791. At that point, it was merely a federal provision, and the states varied on their choices of how to include the right to bear arms in their own constitution. In fact, some chose not to include it at all. It has been described as an auxiliary right, supporting the natural rights of self-defense. Political thought at the time was rightfully concerned about political corruption and governmental tyranny. A personal right to bear arms was a potential check against tyranny. The wording of the amendment is somewhat ambiguous, and has been subjected to much interpretation. Additionally, the exact wording and punctuation of the amendment changes from document to document, until its final version, the way it appears in the Bill of Rights. In modern commentary, the different opinions have been classified into 3 interpretive models: 1) Individual- rights model → it is the right of an individual to own and possess firearms. 2) The collective model → the right belongs to people collectively rather than individuals; the rights only purpose is to enable...
Words: 1033 - Pages: 5
...Second Amendment: Still Valid after 200 years Jeremiah A. Dozier ITT Technical Institute The subject of this research paper is on a particular subject that has spurred an ongoing debate for many years, the Second Amendment. To this day many Americans have raised the question is the Second Amendment still valid after 200 years? The answer to that question is YES! When the founding fathers signed the Constitution in this document there are many Articles and the First ten are known as the bill rights and the first one is the right to free speech, most everyone is in agreement that is one of the most important rights as citizens. Now the Second Amendment which 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”. In this paper it is the authors’ intension to show why this Amendment is important today and in the future. The Second Amendment has been a part of this country since the very beginning of our great nation. Fast forward to the present, they are now people saying the Second Amendment is no longer valid or needed. How can that be we not need this right or it no longer applies to the present day? One of the main reasons most people say we don’t need this fundamental right is because of the recent waves of shootings around this country. The only response is to put a ban on firearms or limit how many rounds a weapons magazine can hold. The Second Amendment is in place as...
Words: 2105 - Pages: 9
...Second Amendment In this research paper, I will argue for the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment deals with the rights of United States citizens to bear, and keep arms. Many people are against the Second Amendment and want to abolish it, and have guns removed from United States citizens. The Constitution was written to protect the rights of the people in the United States, and by taking away guns would infringe on our constitutional rights. How would citizens defend themselves in a life or death situation if guns were to be taken away? The Fourteenth Amendment "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; ... " (Taylor; par. 21) was integrated with the Second Amendment right, to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense. Self-defense includes, protecting your-self and family from imminent harm, and being able to protect one’s personal property. The use of deadly force maybe necessary to help in defending your-self from an intruder entering your home, or to prevent a kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, robbery, or domestic violence. Regulations have been implemented through-out state and local governments to help aid in gun ownership. Reasonable restrictions have been executed to control, that who can possess a gun. To name a few gun control restrictions for gun ownership are people who have...
Words: 1377 - Pages: 6
...Challenging the Second Amendment The second amendment in the Constitution states, “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” This amendment has become a controversial topic in the U.S. Many people support this amendment, arguing that it allows people to protect themselves. However, others disagree with this claim because guns are a safety issue themselves. I challenge the second amendment because presented by allowing guns outweigh the potential safety they provide. The founders of America created the second amendment to protect colonists in a time of war. These people had no other choices than to fight or be enslaved under the monarchy of Britain. Their situation encouraged the creation of the right to bear...
Words: 752 - Pages: 4
...All the Amendments are very important and they all have something different to say. The Amendment that is most important to me is the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment is the Right to bear arms. When you see the right to bear arms, many things come to mind. I picked this Amendment because I am a huge fan of hunting, I’m all about protecting my family in our home, and the most important one of all is our military. During hunting season, it is a time for me to spend time with my family. I have been out hunting since I was about eight years old. I found it to be a great sport and a great way to get food for your family. The second reason this Amendment is important is Americans should have the right to carry and hold guns in their homes....
Words: 1261 - Pages: 6
...Was the Second Amendment Designed to Protect an Individual’s Right to Own Guns? People have a lot of different views of if the Second Amendment really was designed to protect an individual’s right to own guns. Robert Shalhope believes that the Second Amendment helped Americans to own guns so that they could maintain freedom and liberty. Lawrence Delbert on the other hand believes that the second amendment was made just for “well-regulated militia.” The well-regulated militia in our day and age would be more like cops or the armed forces, anybody protecting over the people of America. The Second Amendment can be interpreted in a lot of different ways. These two authors have two opposite views on the Second Amendment and what it says. Each...
Words: 717 - Pages: 3
...The Controversy of the Second Amendment of the Constitution 997 words (2.8 double-spaced pages) Red (FREE) I. INTRODUCTION: The Second Amendment to the Constitution(Second Amendment) of the United States of America(USA) is one of the most controversial. The Second Amendment specifically grants that, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed" The way that an individual interprets the wording of the Second Amendment influences their point of view on who has the right to "keep and bear arms" (Amendment 2). The controversy brought on by the Second Amendment is because the Second Amendment does not clearly define whom "the people" are. This ambiguity has left room for action by legislative bodies and the courts to pass laws and make interpretations that influence the way this Amendment is applied and enforced. 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." (Amendment 2). A central argument put forth by gun-control advocates is that since there is no longer a "militia", that individuals should lose their rights to own a gun. They often assert that the term "militia" should now be defined as each state's National Guard or Reserves. On the other hand, anti gun control advocates argue that the Second Amendment clearly states that the people have the right to own and bear arms even if they are not part of an organized...
Words: 1005 - Pages: 5
...Since December 5, 1791 the people have had the right to keep and bear arms. This amendment has been in effect for more than a century. However, throughout time, many people have tried to abolish or restrict this amendment. After tragic events that have been caused by some misusing their Second Amendment right, some have debated the interpretation of the Second Amendment. By abolishing citizen’s right to keep and bear arms, it is like exterminating citizen’s right of freedom of speech and religion. This has initiated controversy around the world. James Madison composed the Second Amendment in 1791(Garret). The Second Amendment declares, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to...
Words: 546 - Pages: 3
...Submit Analysis The first ten amendments of the US Constitution make up what is known as the Bill of Rights. Written by James Madison in response to the requests from many of the states for better constitutional protection for individual freedoms, the Bill of Rights lists specific prohibitions on governmental power. I have chosen to discuss the second amendment for this week’s analysis. The second amendment of the US Constitution 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.” In more simple terms the second amendment says that it is the right of the people, under certain regulations, to possess and carry firearms. However like any other legal right it has its limitations. Now no state has the authority to take your second amendment rights from you but they can place limits on it. Usually these limits are placed using licensing requirements and bans on certain guns in a certain class. Being a registered owner of firearms, this amendment is very important to me. I have yet been in a situation where the use of my gun was needed, and I hope that that situation never transpires. On a day to day basis we all venture out into a world of unknown evils, where at a moment’s notice that situation could occur. This amendment gives me the right to own a firearm, and in turn allows me to feel safer in my daily life. If not for the second amendment I would not have the ability to...
Words: 478 - Pages: 2
...The Second Amendment is interpreted by Liberals and Conservatives in two very different ways. 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." Student News Daily recalls of the viewpoints of Liberals and Conservatives on gun control and the Second Amendment. Student News Daily states, for a Liberal perspective, that “The Second Amendment does not give citizens the right to keep and bear arms, but only allows for the state to keep a militia (National Guard). Individuals do not need guns for protection; it is the role of local and federal government to protect the people through law enforcement agencies and the military. Additional gun control laws are necessary to stop gun violence and limit the ability of criminals to obtain guns. More guns mean more violence.” Liberals believe that control over guns saves lives. Gun-rights advocates and...
Words: 928 - Pages: 4
...those being the right to bear arms. Richard Henry Lee, one of our founding fathers, put it best when he said, “ To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, how to use them.” Since the very beginning of our country, guns have been an important part of our lives. Our founding fathers understood the importance of the second amendment and like them, I firmly believe that the second amendment is key to upholding our freedom. Under no circumstances should the government have the right to disarm the American people. The second amendment was put into place to give us control of our own defense; it is meant to give us the opportunity...
Words: 897 - Pages: 4
...The second amendment is the right to bear arms.Gun control has been a topic that has been wanted to be changed around the world from many incidents that have occured one such as the Sandy Hook shooting.Many people feel that some citizens take advantage of the Second Amendment. Two states that have strict gun laws are known to be New Jersey and Louisiana. These states differ in the area of mental health checks and how many gun can be purchased in a certain amount of time. The consequences are clear in the history of gun violence in these states. To begin with, a differ that both states share is the mental health checks.As shown in the article Christie signs N.J. gun law bolstering mental health checks it states"It makes it mandatory for mental health records to be submitted to a national database".What this means is during the process of purchasing a gun the person you’re buying it from will have to report your identity for a...
Words: 463 - Pages: 2
...There has been a lot of debate surrounding the Second Amendment of the US Constitution and the purpose that it serves. To understand the Second Amendment, one must understand the history that surrounds it. The main reason that the Second Amendment was created was fear. A fear that was based on the misuse of power originating from a tyrannical monarch. The citizens of the thirteen original colonies endured many abuses at the hands of King George III. They were British citizens that were treated as though they were a conquered people, indirect contrast to the citizens living in mainland Brittan. They were subject to taxation without any form of representation in Parliament, forced to quarter British armies within the colonies without permission, unable to trade or set prices for trade without the sole consent of Brittan, colonies lacked the ability to self-govern, and unfair imprisonment. These, and other occurrences, made it...
Words: 510 - Pages: 3
