Drawing Influence From Levinson ( 1989 )

Decent Essays

Drawing influence from Levinson (1989) once again, I would like to argue that there is not or should not be an understanding that the Second Amendment is of greater importance and a higher degree of static understanding than other aspects of the Constitution. Levinson critiques this condition of the American population as follows; “If one does accept the plausibility of any of the arguments on behalf of a strong reading of the Second Amendment, but, nevertheless, rejects them in the name of social prudence and the present-day consequences produced by finicky adherence to earlier understandings, why do we not apply such consequentialist criteria to each and every part of the Bill of Rights” (p. 657). The Second Amendment, of course, is an important piece of the American Constitution. However, it is not or should not be the case that this particular amendment is so hotly contested while other similarly important articles go unquestioned. There seems to be an absolute political influence in the debate of this topic which is simply unfair to the amendment and Americans. While this issue does not hit directly on the constitutionality of gun possession, it does bring to light one point of consideration when trying to determine the legality of this seemingly exclusively American desire. To continue, the Constitution does not explicitly speak for self-defense-oriented firearm possession; the central desire for many Americans who wish to own guns. The document does guarantee the

Get Access