Essay on How Big is Your Gun

The first speaker, Dr. Khal Schneider, addresses the words behind the 2nd amendment. He provides us with a historical background around the formation of the amendment and further describes the works that are within this amendment. He highlights words such as “Militia”, “necessary”, “arms”, and “infringed”. He describes how these words can be interpreted differently, thus making it hard to actually interpret the amendment for what it actually means. For instance, he draws attention to the word “arms” and describes the evolution. He illustrates that his amendment must be looked at in respects to the century it was written in. He then describes the difference between “arms’ within both centuries. He draws attention to the increase

In December 1791, the Second Amendment was made: The Second Amendment offers “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep arms, and shall not be infringed.” This basically means United States gives the right to its residents to keep arms, and it guaranteed individuals the right to possess arms for their own personal defense. In the past few decades there been thousands of pages that are written seeking to uncover the meaning of the “the people,” and “bear arms,” have been strongly debated.

Amendment; this is the Amendment that is used as the basis for each American having the right to bear arms. It has certainly been a subject of conversation in the US; proponents argue that no one has the authority to take that right away from US citizens while opponents asking for an amendment that would allow the amendment to acclimate to current realities of the 21st century (Levintova, 2014). To understand the problem with the second amendment, one has to go back to the origin of the said law; the bill of rights was first created in 1789 along with the first ten amendments, to understand the intent of the authors of said amendments.

Gun control in the United States has been a controversial issue for some time now. So much so that the Supreme Court even refuses to address this issue directly. Gun control really boils down to the the Second Amendment of the Constitution. Many people have different interpretations of the Second Amendment and the trenches are dug in deep on this issue. The Second Amendment can not provide the right to bear all types of arms to protect the people from governmental tyranny. If the Second Amendment was absolute, then we would allow the public to possess nuclear weapons, missiles, and other such arms, because like the 9 mm handgun that is an arm, a nuclear warhead is also a type of arm. The more our government restricts our rights to own

The right to bear arms is a birth given right to all Americans by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Second Amendment has become controversial recently due to the technological advancement of firearms. Modern firearms are capable of both high rates of fire and greater capacities of ammunition, unlike the single shot muskets that were available at the time of the Second Amendment’s conception. American liberals view these improvements in firearms as dangerous and unnecessary. However, no matter how dangerous firearms may be, the Second Amendment is a necessity for one factor alone: protection from one’s own government and it must be upheld. The Second Amendment provides a physical tool for Americans to defend themselves against a tyrannical government, it allows Americans to form militias against a tyrannical government, and it allows Americans to maintain comparable firearms of the U.S. government in order to prevent the potential loss of American freedoms in the future.

America needs to institute, and initiate gun control laws throughout the entire nation. But not everybody who inhabits the United States believes in regulating arms. Those who are against establishing gun laws argue that gun control directly infringes upon their “right to bear arms” granted to them by the 2nd Amendment. Anti gun control supporters, such as the National Rifle Association, often claim that the act of regulating guns is a sufficient reason why such an Amendment was introduced in the constitution; to protect themselves from any and all forms of violation of civil liberties and freedom. Supporters of anti gun laws are unwilling to welcome any interpretations of the 2nd Amendment that do not match up “word for word,” as was written in the Bill of Rights.

Over the years the topic of gun control has turned out to be very polemic causing large debates, especially in the United States. A vast majority of people who are against gun control insist that is their right to own a gun mainly for self defense, while others who are for it, point out that it is not necessary to have access to certain guns like the military-style weapons therefore a ban should take place.

As a constitutional researcher, I’ve been assigned to take a closer look at the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. The Second Constitution reads “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the societies of a free state, the right of people to keep and to bear arms shall not be infringed.” Specifically, I am reviewing the portion of the amendment that speaks to the right to bear arms. I believe there are several constitutional issues with this part of the amendment that may not apply to today’s world.

​In his book ‘Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America,’ Wrinkler tried to present an unbiased view towards the second amendment in the light of historical events and landmark cases that has tried to challenge or obtain the court’s interpretation. One of such cases is the ‘District of Columbia v. Heller’ case, which was argued and decided in 2008 (Supreme Court of the United States). For several instances, the provision in the Second Amendment that pertains to the right of an individual to bear arms has been contested. In fact, the clause, which states that “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”, is perhaps the most misconstrued clause in the American constitution (Supreme Court of the United States). Adding to the significance of this highly debatable clause is the fact that a flurry of gun related incidences has happened in the United States in the past that has taken many lives including that of children. Among the most significant authors that has attempted to answer the question or at least laid out the possibilities regarding the second amendment is Adam Wrinkler. In light of Winkler’s arguments as well as with other sources, this paper will examine the historical

One of the most controversial issues in our society today is the topic of private gun ownership and gun control laws. This controversy has arisen mostly due to the different ways that the second constitutional amendment is interpreted. The amendment states that "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" (Lott, 2000). On one side of the issue, there are those that believe that the amendment guarantees the right of individuals to possess and carry a wide variety of firearms. On the other side are those that contend that the amendment was only meant to guarantee to States the right to operate militias.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution gave United States citizens the right to bear arms. Although, the Second Amendment stated: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms. However, the framers could not foresee the type of violence we have in our cities today. Innocent citizens have and are being brutally killed due to this amendment. Stricter gun control laws must be enacted to receive these types of weapons.

When America first became a country branching away from Great Britain, firearms played a huge role. After the war, firearms were still an every day thing for civilians, using them for hunting and or self-defense. With the second amendment has come with a controversial topic when it comes to regulating guns in our country. This topic affects the United States nationally, as well as local state to state as they try to regulate how guns should be handled. From the core amendment values such as the second amendment have changed how the amendment is viewed overtime, so has the evolution of guns and how they are viewed in today’s society.

buying a gun. Already, a background check is required for all individuals who wish to buy a

According to The Second Amendment of the Constitution, the citizens of the United States have the right to own and bear arms, in order to form a well-regulated militia for the security of the states. This right has been discussed for decades as an important issue for the American society, and it has been one of the most controversial issues in the second half of the twentieth century until nowadays. This right germinated with the threat to freedom that the standing army of professional soldiers brought to the Americans. Some argued that the right to bear arms is mainly concerned with self-defense while others argued that this right was implemented to avoid militia disarmament and protect the Free State. This right was

“The second amendment of The United States Bill of Rights is my concealed weapons permit, period.”- Ted Nugent. Saving lives one by one starts with limiting the purchase, sale, and use of guns in America. According to Alexander Lee, the political and social debate over the question of how much gun control is appropriate and it has been regularly discussed within the last decade. Shootings such as Sandy Hook, and Tucson shootings have raised the government’s awareness on guns and possible restrictions and regulations. Gun talks are discussed with the question, “Will controlling guns cut back on violent crime rates?” Although many guns are open to be sold to the public over 18, there are traditional gun laws that limit who can own them. These laws include sell restrictions to the mentally disabled, the age in which you can obtain a gun, background checks, and dishonorably discharged military personnel. Gun control laws could have a positive effect in America by reducing homicide rates, but at the same time, citizens still have the right to bear arms under the second amendment under the U.S constitution. Gun control laws do not mean the absolute confiscation of guns, but rather reduce the amount of power a gun and the amount of ammo that a gun can hold.