...Gun Control in the United States Gun control is a very controversial topic. Many believe that the people of the United States have the right to bear arm. Others believe that guns in general should be banned from our country. Is it the people or 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...
Words: 1026 - Pages: 5
...Gun Control Over the past few years gun control has become a major issue for politicians as a result of increased shootings. Some people argue that the increase in violent shootings should be a cause to promote greater gun control. Whereas others will say that if there were fewer restrictions on guns then violent shootings would occur less often. Because of each there is no clear solution it is a touchy issue among politicians and very few laws are passed with regards to either argument. 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” (Wikipedia). This amendment has been the largest reason why there is not stricter gun control because no politician will do anything that comes remotely close to going against the Constitution. Both state and federal courts have used two models to interpret the Second Amendment: the "individual rights" model, which holds that individuals hold the right to bear arms, and the "collective rights" model, which holds that the right depends on militia membership. The collective rights model has been discarded by the U.S. Supreme Court, in favor of the individual rights model. The primary U.S. Supreme Court Second Amendment cases include District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), and McDonald v. Chicago(2010). In Heller and McDonald the U.S. Supreme Court supported the individual rights model, under which the Second Amendment...
Words: 1428 - Pages: 6
...the first United States Supreme Court case, since the New Deal, to set limits on Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause of the United State Constitution. United States v. Lopez dealt with a previous decision made by the Supreme Court called the “Gun-Free Schools Zone Act of 1990,” and whether this act was constitutional. In other words, is Congress given the power by the Constitution to regulate guns in schools under the Commerce Clause? Alfonso Lopez Jr. was a twelfth-grade student at Edison High School in San Antonio, Texas. On March 10, 1992, he carried a concealed .38 caliber revolver and five cartridges into the school. When confronted by school authorities, Lopez admitted he had the weapon. He was then arrested and charged under Texas law with firearm possession on school property. This was dismissed after federal agents charged Lopez with being in violation of the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990. This act forbids, “any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that [he] knows ... is a school zone.” Lopez was found guilty following a bench trial and sentenced to six months’ imprisonment and two years’ supervised release. However, Lopez did not believe that this act was constitutional. He moved to dismiss the indictment on the grounds that the Gun-Free School Zones Act was, “unconstitutional because it was beyond the powers of Congress to legislate control over public schools” (Source 1.) The trail court denied this motion. The court ruled that it was a, “constitutional...
Words: 1812 - Pages: 8
...In United States v. Lopez (1995), the Supreme Court ruled that Congress had exceeded its constitutional authority under the Commerce Clause when it passed a law prohibiting gun possession in local school zones. The case arose out of the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, which made it a federal offense "for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone." Alfonso Lopez Jr., a high school senior, was convicted in a federal district court for knowingly possessing a concealed handgun and bullets at his San Antonio high school. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision, ruling that the law was beyond the reach of Congress's power under the Commerce Clause. The government appealed to the Supreme Court, which reviewed the case in 1994. The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist and released in 1995, ruled that the Gun-Free School Zones Act was unconstitutional and overturned Lopez's conviction. The Court ruled that the act exceeded the limited powers of Congress under the Constitution, rejecting the government's argument that the act was constitutional because the buying and selling of guns and associated illicit activities affect "interstate commerce," which Congress may regulate under the Commerce Clause. The government claimed that gun violence in schools leads to both more dangerous and thus less commercially healthy neighborhoods and less...
Words: 604 - Pages: 3
...Before the ruling the Supreme Court had not openly acknowledged the assimilation of the Second and Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court decided to determine the Second and Fourteenth Amendments as being integrated due to the fundamental nature of self-defense and the need to bear arms in able to guarantee self-protection. The Court confirmed that the Fourteenth Amendment was created to create equal protection of all people. The Court decided that it was not a good idea to treat the right to bear arms any differently than any of the other rights that are listen within the Bill of Rights unless there is an overwhelmingly good reason to do...
Words: 1177 - Pages: 5
...United States Constitution which can also be called the “Supreme Law” of our land. Gun control advocates usually always invoke the second amendment in arguments related to stricter gun laws while the anti-gun side claims the second amendment does not include rights of an individual. The second amendment states “The right of the people to keep and bear arms” thus any attempt to set unreasonable limits on gun ownership does in fact infringe on our constitutional rights because according to our fore fathers we have a right to own firearms for any reason we as a free society deem necessary which may include hunting, self-defense or collecting. Firearms have played a major role in the shaping of American history. From hunting to sporting, collecting and self-defense, Americas’ fascination with firearms can be traced to the American Revolution where armed citizens gained independence through a sustained revolt. Not only did firearms have a role in gaining independence, they were a necessary tool for survival. In order for family’s to survive hunting was the only means to provide food. In the days of the “wild west” there was little to no law and order, family’s relied solely on firearms to protect themselves and their property. As firearms became more prevalent so did the laws governing the use of them. While the second amendment protects our rights as citizens, we rely on our government to adhere to the constitution. The gun lobby has consistently argued that the Second Amendment...
Words: 1007 - Pages: 5
...Juvenile Justice course I have found some remarkable Supreme Court cases that in an essence changed the way juveniles are prosecuted today. The first case I will discuss is the Roper v. Simmon case in 1993 and the sentencing change in 2004. The second case is Yarborough v. Alvarado in 2004. I will discuss criminal justice theories that may help explain the crime. The juvenile courts and juvenile corrections prosecution and punishment of minor persons accused in each case. Also, the victims’ family’s reaction to the legislations decision to change the law in each case. This discussion should illustrate a clear picture of the importance each case played in the juvenile justice system. The Roper v. Simmons case starting...
Words: 1475 - Pages: 6
...An appeal is a proceeding where a ruling from a lower court is reviewed by a higher court in an attempt to convince the higher court that the lower courts judgment was incorrect. Appeals are an important part of the criminal justice process. Appeals are part of the system of checks and balances. They are important because they ensure that defendants have received due process in the prior stages of the criminal justice process and it ensures that none of their civil rights were violated. They are also important because the law is often unspecific to certain legal guidelines. When society and technology change law often stays the same. It is through appeals where the law changes and adapts to society. Appellate Court decisions in one jurisdiction can act as a guideline for other jurisdictions that need to make rulings on similar cases. All appellate rulings also affect law enforcement agencies as they must also adapt to the change of the law. The appeals process begins with a conviction in trial court. After that it must follow the ladder of being appealed starting with the state appellate court. Following the state court and if there is a constitutional matter or federal law matter it will then be reviewed by the federal appellate court. Should the appeal process need to go further up the ladder it will reach the highest court the United States Supreme Court who would make the final ruling. Not every case can be appealed. You can not appeal a case solely because you think you...
Words: 1068 - Pages: 5
...The District of Columbia passed the 1975 Firearms Control Regulations Act. This act made it illegal to own handguns, automatic firearms, or high capacity rifles and prohibited the possession of unregistered firearms. Dick heller a special police officer in the District of Columbia carried a firearm as part of his job. He was granted access into federal buildings with the gun, but the new provision made it illegal to possess in his own home. Along with Dick Heller, five other D.C. residents tried to seek resolution to not being able to have a handgun and challenge the constitutionality of this problem.They filed lawsuit in the District Court for the District of Columbia. This was dismissed by District Court Judge Ricardo M. Urbina. The case...
Words: 372 - Pages: 2
...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
...violating the Body Armor Act. The Body Armor Act of 2002 pronounced that any guilty violent felon wearing body armor was breaking the law. When police stopped Alderman, they discovered he was wearing a bulletproof vest and therefore violating the statute. (http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/01/10/scotus.appeals.rejected/index.html) While possessing the vest was legal under Washington state law, wearing the vest given his criminal record was illegal under the Body Armor Act. A California company manufactured the vest in 1996, later selling it to a distributor in Washington state where Alderman eventually purchased it. The court never questioned this information nor did it accuse Alderman of buying the vest out-of-state or transporting it over state lines....
Words: 1626 - Pages: 7
...homes, and chances are, one of them will have a gun. In a study done by Harvard University in 2004, thirty-eight percent of American households reported owning at least one gun. For generations, it has been a proudly proclaimed by Americans that they have the right to bear arms. This right, however, is under attack from the forty-six percent of Americans who now believe that the United States needs to pass stricter gun laws or change the second amendment. This number is decreased three points from just four months ago (Diamond). The second amendment should not be repealed or amended due to the Supreme Court’s YEAR ruling on the second amendment, the lack of success of gun control in other countries, and the necessity of...
Words: 714 - Pages: 3
...Anthony Cuda HST 388 Court in Context 9/21/14 McCulloch vs. Maryland Court in Context In order to fully understand how gauge whether a Supreme Court case is impactful, it is necessary to understand the types of Supreme Court cases that make up the majority of cases. According to Hall, the Supreme Court has roughly five limited functions; these are “regime enforcement, division of labor, overcoming gridlock, blame avoidance, and legitimation.” These functions are important to understand to really classify a Supreme Court case as truly important. For most people, who do not know history very well, it can be hard to understand how a case tried over 200 years impacts their life today. In the cases succeeding Marbury V. Madison (the first case to use a process known as Judicial Review) we can see these functions being exercised and develop over time....
Words: 846 - Pages: 4
...Paul French Professor Keefe English 063 12.5.13 GUN CONTROL Is there a way to control gun distribution? I’m not sure. The control of guns has been an ongoing issue going back before the 2nd Amendment was introduced (December, 15, 1791). Prior to this Amendment people that owned guns basically made up their own laws. They were able to carry and use guns in a way that fit their life style. For the most part they would use them for hunting and self-protection being able to carry their guns either concealed or in the open was a decision they were able to make themselves. As stated, people could use their guns for hunting which provided food for their family or possibly an income if they could sell the game killed. But there were some people that would use their guns in more destructive ways. They would use their guns as a source of power to control different situations. Some examples would be, bank, train, or stagecoach robberies, territorial fights for land (The Hatfield’s and McCoy’s) the fight for political power. In each of these examples if things went wrong or if someone died there is a very good chance that guns were involved. It was only a matter of time that manufacturing of firearms for the purpose of distribution needed to be controlled. Hence the 2nd Amendment, whereas the people of this great nation have the Right to Keep and Bear Arms through the eyes of the law. Though this amendment is a big part of our constitutional right as...
Words: 1110 - Pages: 5
...that the power of the Supreme Court cannot be justified in a democracy. The Supreme Court: Functions of judiciaries; judicial independence. Membership, appointment process and issues of judicial review; accountability and democratic control. Theories of judicial activism and restraint. The supreme Court is the head of the judicial part of Government in the USA, it acts as an appellant court which can also on occasion deal with ambassadorial and diplomat cases. It is separate from the other 2 branches of government in order to remain independent and provides a powerful check on those branches. However it has been criticised by being called democratically lacking. The members have a significant amount of power however are unelected and unable to be dismissed. The most significant issue with the Supreme Court’s power is its (lack of) accountability, this is largely caused by the appointment process. The Supreme court has had significant influence over public legislation since the Marbury vs Madison case of 1803 and increasingly so since Chief Justice Warren’s court who made controversial decisions regarding segregation (Brown vs Topeka) and Abortion (Roe vs Wade). This has continued to more recent court cases such as the 2012 Windsor vs USA which recognised gay marriage striking down DOMA (the 1996 Defence of Marriage Act) which stated that only heterosexual marriage would be federally recognised. This has led to the appointment process of Supreme Justices to come under...
Words: 1369 - Pages: 6
