...The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution 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." Such language has created considerable debate regarding the Amendment's intended meaning. For example, some people believe that the Amendment's phrase "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" creates an individual constitutional right for citizens of the United States. Under this "individual right theory," the United States Constitution restricts legislative bodies from banning or prohibiting the owning of firearms, or at the very least, the Amendment indirectly states that getting rid of or restricting citizens who own these types of weapons is unconstitutional. On the other hand, some scholars believe that because of...
Words: 1465 - Pages: 6
...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
...The Amendments We as (American) citizens were given a series of 10 amendments at the birth of our country called the Bill of Rights. These amendments were instituted on September 17, 1787 when the U.S. Constitution was signed. In my opinion there are 3 amendments that should be respected to the fullest. These 3 include: The Second, Eighth, and Ninth Amendment respectively. I feel that these 3 are the most important in our constitution today. Primarily, is the Second Amendment, or our right to bear arms. This amendment, in my opinion, is the most important. It is stated as: “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.” It enumerates our right to keep and bear arms. This protects U.S from a Tyrannical government as it levels out the power between the citizens and the government. Also, this allows for people to use arms for self-defense and entertainment. Next, is the 8th Amendment. This amendment is written as: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” For example you cannot get life in prison for not paying your parking ticket, or your bail cannot be set at a rate at which it’s almost impossible for someone to pay. This is part of a person(s) having the right to a fair and just trial....
Words: 433 - Pages: 2
...Today in America, gun control is a very serious issue. There are different opinions on this issue, the National Rifle Association (NRA), feels that guns are safe when used for protection by responsible citizens, others feel that guns are far to dangerous to be kept in homes, and that guns should not be owned by anyone, only used by the National Guard and law enforcement. These people think their opinions are correct according to the second amendment, the amendment that deals with the bearing of arms by citizens of America, but there have been different interpretations of it. The reason that people feel gun ownership is such a problem is that so many people lose their lives by them each year. Personally, I feel that guns lead to increases in crime, murder, and household accidents. By reducing availability of guns and providing education on gun safety, I think that these things will help make America safer. Before making up my mind on what I felt about the issue, I made sure to consider the opinions of others and to collect statistics. People from the (NRA), who are against gun control, feel that the people are responsible for the negative effects guns have on America. Helen Smith, a forensic psychologist who shares the ideas of the NRA, wrote an article titled “It’s Not The Guns”. In this article, she talks about the increase in school and youth violence, relating to guns. She blames the children and irresponsible parents. She denies that guns are easier for kids to get today...
Words: 1303 - Pages: 6
...FACTS: The jury sentenced Atkins to death, but the Virginia Supreme Court ordered a second sentencing hearing because the trial court had used a misleading verdict form. During resentencing the same forensic psychologist testified, but this time the State rebutted Atkins' intelligence. The jury again sentenced Atkins to death. In affirming, the Virginia Supreme Court relied on Penry v. Lynaugh, in rejecting Atkins'...
Words: 1026 - 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
...Annotated Bibliography “Five myths about gun control” By Robert J. Spitzer, December 21, 2012 1. I like this article because it states specific facts about gun control and not just opinions. It talks about all the myths about gun control, one myth is that gun control is a losing battle for Democrats. But, that is false because many democrats have voiced their opinion on the topic. Another myth is that guns are deadliest as murder weapons which has been also proven false because statistics show that gun suicide is more common than gun homocide. Another myth is that American schools have become shooting galleries. Horrible incidents like Sandy Hook and Columbine have happened but schools are still a safe place. Schools are starting to take a lot of precautions like lock down drills, metal detectors, and the presense of a resource officer. “…the odds of a child dying from a violent attack at school are about one in a million.”which may be very comforting to you but unfortunetely not to the families in connecticut and elsewhere. Another myth Robert talks about in this article is that gun regulations are incompatible with America’s gun heritage, but today four states have completely elimintated permits for handgun ownership and carrying. The last myth that Robert talks about is that the Second Amendment was intended to protect the right of Americans to raise up against a tyrannical government. If that was true it would defeat the whole purpose of the Bill of Rights. Robert writes,...
Words: 1769 - Pages: 8
...Police Department has been using the “stop and frisk” tactic at an alarming rate. The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects against unreasonable searches, and the New York City Police Department’s use of “stop and frisk,” in general, stopped people on the street without any reasonable suspicion that the individual had participated in criminal activity. The New York City Police Department’s policy of implementing “stop and frisk” so broadly violates the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment protects “the right of the people to be secure in their persons… papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches…” The Federal District Court in Manhattan has since opinioned that the New York City Police Department’s use of “stop and frisk” is in violation of the Constitution. The brief nature of the stop and search of the individuals does not make the process reasonable. The act of stopping a citizen in public and questioning and searching him or her no matter how long or short the engagement constitutes a search and as such requires reasonable suspicion. This interpretation is derived from the clear opinion of the Supreme Court stating that a person’s Fourth Amendment protections are not limited to the confines of one’s house, but can be expected as one walks the street or travels the road. Therefore, it is necessary for the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to affirm the judgment of the district court and guarantee the reformation of the New...
Words: 359 - Pages: 2
...In the Supreme Court Case of Lawrence vs. Texas, the opinions of the judges, and why the majority say “yah” and the minority say “nay” After a ruling in a Supreme Court Case the judges will state their opinions, whether it is a majority opinion, concurring opinions, or dissenting opinions. The reasoning and logic that goes into each of these justices decisions on whether a law has been broken, outdated, or irrelevant in the modern times in America in relation to the Constitution and past relevant cases can be heard and seen by the opinions expressed by the justices. In the Supreme Court Case of Lawrence v Texas, a case in 2003 about two men that were charged in Texas with committing sodomy, the vote came to a six to three decision, after which,...
Words: 1118 - Pages: 5
...head up the fight against the District Attorney of Texas, Henry Wade. Henry Wade chose one of his most capable lawyers, John Tolle, to defend him in this suit. Coffee and Weddington went off the argument that, "A woman is guaranteed the right to an abortion by her constitutional right to privacy. No state could interfere with a woman's decision to have an abortion which was a private matter." They based this on the first, fourth, fifth, eighth, ninth and fourteenth amendments. The first amendment protects a person's right to freedom of speech, which had been violated when a doctor was not aloud to talk to their patient about all forms of treatment. Coffee and Weddington stated that the fourth amendment, which protects a citizen from unreasonable search and seizure, should protect a person from being unlawfully questioned about their contraception. The Fifth Amendment creates privacy around citizens, which are safeguarded and should not be violated by the government. Coffee and Weddington used the eighth amendment, which guards against cruel and unusual punishment, in this case placed...
Words: 1446 - Pages: 6
...Hi The articles "Freedom of Speech: Missouri Knights of the Ku Klux Klan v. Kansas City" and "Freedom of Religion: Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association" both engage in conflicts pertaining to the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights. "Freedom of Speech: Missouri Knights of the Ku Klux Klan v. Kansas City" is an article about the KKK's attempt to spread their beliefs through a public access cable television channel. Dennis Mahon and Allan Moran, both of the KKK, asked to be broadcasted on air in 1987, and the whole situation led to a major problem. The KKK is known for its killings, prejudice, and cross burnings, and they wanted to be shown on television to further spread their message. The First Amendment states the right to the freedom of speech, but many of the community members had a problem with the whole situation. People with race relations, local leaders, and members of the cable company did not want to grant the KKK the right to appear on air. Black ministers and important politicians were not happy with the KKK's request to voice their opinions. The KKK complied with all of the rules that were presented by the cable company, even when they were told to create a locally produced show and receive training in video production. They happily obeyed the regulations and didn't cause additional problems to what they were soon to face. The cable company studio was located in a neighborhood that was 95% black, and violence was a major concern for the cable...
Words: 8654 - Pages: 35
...The Second Amendment (Amendment II) to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Constitution that protects the right to keep and bear arms by its citizens. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights. The right to bear arms predates the Bill of Rights; the Second Amendment was based partially on the right to bear arms in English common-law, and was influenced by the English Bill of Rights of 1689. This right was described as an auxiliary right, supporting the natural rights of self-defense, resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defense of the state. Academic inquiry into the purpose, scope, and effect of the amendment has been controversial and subject to numerous interpretations both by constitutional scholars and ordinary citizens. America has a long history of its citizens keeping and bearing arms. The earliest settlers from Virginia thru New England used their firearms to hunt for game to feed their families and protect them from attack from both two and four legged predators. Firearms in essence, changed the culture of guns in the Americas. Gun control is another of those pesky freedoms granted by the countries forefathers in the attempt to protect the citizenry from a tyrannical ruling government. Our founding fathers have provided many quotes regarding why they adopted the Second Amendment Here are but a few of them: (Guncite.Com) "A free people ought to be armed." - George Washington ...
Words: 1681 - Pages: 7
...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
...charged with "the desecration of a venerated object." He was found guilty and faced a sentence of a $2,000 fine and one year in prison. Johnson, appalled by this decision, appealed his case to the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas. This court agreed with the prior one and ruled to have his conviction stand. In response, the still angry Johnson appealed his case to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. This court, unlike the previous two, found Johnson to be innocent because it found that the First Amendment protected Johnson's behavior. To arrive at this decision, the court first quickly decided that Johnson's actions feel under the First Amendment protection of free speech because it was expressive conduct. Because of this, the state would need to prove that circumstances existed which would make the state interest outweigh the First Amendment. The court found that there was not a strong enough state interest to overrule the protection of the First Amendment and overturned the previous ruling....
Words: 1116 - 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
