The Second Amendment Of The Constitution

In America guns have been a part of the country’s society since it’s birth. Throughout history the citizens of the US have used firearms to protect the nation, protect their families, hunt for food and engage in sporting activities. The issue of Guns and gun control is complex. Weighing the rights and liberties of the individual against the welfare and safety of the public has always been a precarious balancing act. In the United States, gun control is one of these tumultuous issues that has both sides firmly entrenched in their positions. Those parties in favor of gun ownership and the freedom to use and keep arms, rely on the fact that the provision for such rights is enshrined in their constitution. In this climate of

The Second Amendment is a part of the Bill of Rights, (the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution) the framework to elucidate upon the freedoms of the individual. The Bill of Rights was planned and sent to the states, and were later ratified on December 15, 1791.The first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution were introduced by James Madison as a series of legislative articles and came into effect as Constitutional Amendments following the process of ratification (three-fourths of the States) on December 15, 1791.

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.

Death, violence, individual rights, crime, and cost are many words that arise when researching the controversial topic of gun control. This issue revolves around the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and 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.” Is there a black and white answer or is there a need to find a middle ground? The foundational right must be preserved for an individual to own a gun. However, basic safety measures need to be in place for added protection and security of all Americans. To explore why this balance is the best option, it is necessary to look further into the

The first amendment is one of the most used amendments today. Everyone in the world uses it and sometimes takes advantage of it and most times uses it when needed to. The Bill Of Rights was created on December 15th of 1779 and was created to make some rules in the future because no one had the freedom to do anything. Most were punished if they spoke their opinion, they did not even have the right to choose their own religion. But that all changed when James Madison wrote the Bill of Rights which is our first ten amendments. The First Amendment is and always will be the most used amendment today.

The truth to the statement that “Texas has a love affair with the 2nd amendment more than any of the other amendments” is circumstantial depending on the interpretation of the 2nd amendment. The second amendment is the most challenged amendment because it is so vaguely worded and not straight forward. It 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.” This somewhat incoherent statement leaves policy makers wondering whether the founding fathers were trying to protect gun ownership rights only for purposes of military duty and collective security or wanted to make guns accessible to all so that they could protect themselves. In order to asses if Texas’ love affair with the second amendment, we must look at the second amendment from both sides of the interpretation.

“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.”

I agree with the outcome because the authorities did not have enough probable cause to force the suspect into giving up his passwords to the encrypted drives. The District Attorney attempted to circumvent the current laws in order to force decryption of the drives that would have violated the suspect’s rights against self incrimination which would have been a direct violation of the Fifth Amendment. If the authorities already had the same evidence they were asking for it would have served no purpose if the drives were decrypted. If the drives did in fact contain the content that the prosecutor claimed to be on the drives and that information would have been used as evidence against the suspect, so the suspect had every legal right to refuse tho give up the passwords. The fact that the suspect invoked his Fifth Amendment rights in which he refused to provide the drives encryption keys or refused to decrypted content is the sole reason why I agreed with the suspect. I also found what the prosecutor attempted to do to be unethical, if he wanted the information that bad with out having the evidence to support his suspicions, he should have followed the law and granted the suspect total, and unlimited immunity from prosecution.

This article mainly talks about the extent of how far the second amendment goes. A federal court ruled that the second amendment includes the right to bear arms but not the right to carry a concealed weapon in the public, this upheld one California law that restricted who can carry concealed weapon in the public. The law stated that there must be a good reason for carrying a conceded weapon in public. Gun enthusiast were greatly upset with the law because they felt like this law violated the second amendment, the right to bear arms. A panel with three judges ruled in favor of the gun supporters but The United States Court of appeals would rule against the original decision with a 7 to 4 ruling. The court’s ruling written statement basically

The continuing Mass Shootings in the United States has caused the gun control debate to intensify. While anti-gun control advocates say the Second Amendment guarantees each individual the right to bear arms, the pro-gun control group reads the Second Amendment as a collective right to bear arms; meaning organized militia are the only ones with that right. This essay will analyse the effectiveness of several different articles which present arguments for and against gun control.

America is the most well armed nation in the world, with American citizens owning about 270 million of the world’s 875 million firearms (Marshall). Indeed, this is more than a quarter of the world’s registered firearms. The reason why Americans own so many guns is because of 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.” (Rauch) This amendment guarantees U.S. citizens the right to have firearms. Since this amendment is relatively vague, it is up for interpretation, and is often used by gun advocates to argue for lenient gun laws. Hence, gun control is a frequently discussed controversial topic in

Gun control has a history dating back to 1791, when the Second Amendment of the Constitution was ratified. However, more recently, the debate over gun control has escalated into a much more public issue to which many citizens can relate. After all, stories about incidents involving guns appear frequently today in newspapers and on television or the radio. One could say that the debate started with the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968, which banned ownership of guns by certain groups of people and regulated the sale of guns. Since then, two main groups have gradually appeared: people who oppose strict federal

In recent years, open carry of handguns has become the controversial issue in America since the Supreme Court’s decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller and in McDonald v. City of Chicago advocated protecting the Second Amendment (MELTZER). More and more states have allowed certain forms of open carry law for handguns, but Texas is one of few states that prohibit outright any open carry of guns (GRIEDER). The Second Amendment of the United States 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.” The people who support the open carry law point out that bans on gun are against the Second Amendment, which established the right for every citizen to keep and bear arms. The National Rifle Association (NRA), the powerful lobby against gun control, believes that human will still use their gun responsibly if there is no law (National Rifle…); however, the people who do not support open carry argue that gun control can decrease the risk of crime and also stop the potential to serial shooters to occur. Since gun control has become a controversial issue in American politics, people might wonder the Second Amendment is about individual or collective right? However, in the book by the author Saul Cornell, A Well-Regulated Militia: The Founding Fathers and the Origins of Gun Control in America, explained the historical evolution of guns right and the idea of individual

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 is the second amendment of our country from the Bill of Rights and is one that needs to be more strictly enforced! There was approximately 33,636 deaths in the US in the year 2015 due to guns, and that is just in our country! That number could have a chance most likely reduce if the country would enforce the second amendment of the Bill of Rights that allows the country to have the freedom of having a weapon. There are actually three main reasons why the US should more strictly enforce gun laws which are the amount of deaths by guns, the things people with guns could do, and hanging the state law of into a national one.

In the debate on whether the right to bear arms remains significant in today’s society, the pro side presented the definition of the Second Amendment as “protecting our right to bear arms short of those that are fully-automatic” in other words excluding weaponry not yet conceived in the minds of the founding fathers who “held the view that citizens reserve the right to bear arms for protection against government, foreign enemies, and criminals alike”.