December 4, 2015, in San Bernardino, CA, fourteen residents at the Inland Regional Center lost their lives due to Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik shooting many residents. Attending a holiday party at the center for thousands of residents with disabilities, Mr. Farook left the center “angry” over a dispute and came back with Ms. Malik. Armed with .223- caliber assault rifles and semiautomatic handguns, they killed 14 residents and wounded at least 17. Shootings seem to be becoming more habitual, therefore, people fear guns and want to enact gun control laws. Recent attacks from terrorist groups spark the question of who should have the right to own guns. Controversies over interpreting the Second Amendment date back to the turn of the twentieth century because so many viewpoints and regulations have accumulated; it is all in the manner of which interpretation citizens subscribe to- loose verses strict interpretation. Due to the controversies, certain gun regulations have been enacted and fears have risen because of this. In the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, it 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.” After the American Revolutionary War, James Madison wrote the Bill of Rights for the Anti- Federalists. The main purpose of the Bill of Rights was to protect individual’s rights and freedoms against the strong national
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.
How can the original writing and intent of the second amendment, be relevant in our society today?
Ratified December 15, 1791, the bill of rights was added to the U.S. Constitution as a way to ensure the protection of every individual’s rights. The bill itself is a list of rights which limits the power of the federal government and gives power back to the people in the form of rights and liberties. Some of this rights include freedom of speech, religion, and press, but perhaps the one right that still to this day has many people questioning the meaning behind its wording is the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment 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” (Acosta, 2008). In short the amendment grants the right to bear arms,
Gun control is one of the most debated about topic today in America; between news outlet, the public, and politicians. As some politicians look to resolve the gun control issues, with banning them, imposing more restriction to sellers, buyers and owner; some people and politicians consider the second amendment to be relic and should be removed from the constitution. History has shown us time and time again even through all the violence and chaos in the world and America, that there is a reason for the creation of the second amendment. From history of America independence in 1776 to the ratification of the bill of right in 1791 the 2nd amendment still remains relevant form it creation, to modern times, and the protection of America’s future; for the freedom of its inhabitants and citizens. The once influential 20th century thinker George Santayana once said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”. Looking back into ancient history, the history of second amendment, recent and current history we can find clues that will support the relevance of the 2nd amendment. We will also define the second amendment and try to find solutions to our current problems from what our forefathers had say.
On December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights was ratified effective by Congress. These first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America promised the states certain rights and freedoms which could not be infringed by the government. After all, the founding fathers knew from experience that men in their weakness were often tempted by power. They had become all too familiar with this when under the control of King George in England. Therefore, in order to protect the future people of their beautiful country, they promised certain liberties which could not be taken away. Every single one of these freedoms is important for the United States of America. However, the second amendment is especially important
On September 17, 1787, the United States Constitution was signed by delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, who were directed by George Washington. The 1787 convention was called to draft a new legal system for the United States now that the states were free and colonized. This new Constitution was made to increase federal authority while still protecting the rights of citizens. It established America’s National Government. In 1971, the Bill of Rights were added to Constitution containing the 10 amendments guaranteeing protection for citizens. The first commandment consisting of freedom of speech and religion. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:
The second amendment of United States constitution said “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 embraced on December 15, 1791, taking in consideration that American citizens have a natural right to self-defense and they can help to accomplish the following purposes:
“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 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.
Repealing the second amendment would not make America safer because it does not penalize the criminals doing harm but the law abiding citizens exercising their right to self-defense. As stated in the book In Our Defense, Zangrilli argues "the ordinance penalizes the victim, not the criminal." An ordinance to prohibit handguns in Morton Grove, a small town in the United States. The point of the 2nd amendment was to be able to balance the power of the state and the power of the people. Around the late 18th century, mass production of firearms ensured that almost everyone could afford a rifle. This equality of arms between the people and the state allowed for individuals to assert their right to self-defense. The ability for the people to resist
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.
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.
To begin with, the Fourth Amendment was constituted to protect the people from unreasonable searches and seizures. However, there are times and cases in which an investigation is started and evidence is collected illegally. There are doctrines such as The Exclusionary Rule and Fruit of the Poisonous Tree in place to eliminate any evidence to be used in court if obtained illegally. This paper will differentiate the two doctrines as well explain how and why the two could possibly be incorporated in the case of “Who did it.” We will also look into the immunity that government officials may have pertaining to civil liability and see if officers affiliated with the “Who did It” case are protected from their actions.
The United States of America has always been referred to as the land of the free. The United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights were put in place to ensure that the citizen’s basic rights were not violated. Even with these documents in place, certain rights have often been the center of heavy debate. The fourth amendment which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, or the first amendment which protects free speech, or the fifth amendment which protects you from self incrimination. Of all these rights that have been brought into question, the most recent is the second amendment which secures the right for the people to keep and bear arms.
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