The Second Amendment - The Right To Bear Arms Essay -- Gun Bear Arms C

The import Amendment And The Right To subscribe ArmsThroughout the years there has been an ongoing postulate oer the Second Amendment and how it should be interpreted. The issue that is being debated is whether our government has the advanced to limit grease- artillerymans. The answer of who has which rights lies within how one interprets the Second Amendment. With this being the case, one must(prenominal) also think about what circumstances the Framers were under when this Amendment was written. There atomic number 18 two major sides to this debate, one being the collective side, which feels that the right was prone for collective purposes moreover. 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 leaveing be reduced and thus save lives. However while gun control laws may decrease criminals rag to guns, the same laws restricts gun owning citizens who fend by the law these citizens make up a great mass of the opposing side of this argument. These people reason out that the law was made with the case-by-case citizens in mind. This group believes that the Amendment should be interpreted to guarantee citizens impoverished 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 of the Bill of Rights statesA well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free separate, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. (Amendment II 1791)This debate has produced two familiar interpretations of the Second Amendment. Advocates of stricter gun control laws get tended to stress that the amendments militia clause guarantees nothing to the individual and that it only protects the states rights to be able to maintain organized military units. These people argue that the Second Amendment was merely used to place the states organized military forces beyond the federal governments power to be able to demilitarize them. This would guarantee that the states would always have sufficient force at their mastery to abolish federal restraints on their rights and to resist by arms if necessary. T... ... stricter gun control, the states are moving in a different direction. The reason pot this action is that the constitutionality of tighter gun control laws is becoming a question. Once the exacting Court of the United States answers this question on the legality of infringing on the right to bear arms we will know what our exact right is. full treatment Cited1 Cottrol, Robert, ed. Gun Control and the Constitution Sources and Explorations on the Second Amendment. New York assortment Publishing Inc., 19942 Do wlut, Robert. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms in State Bills of Rights and Judicial Interpretation. SAF 19933 Freedman, Warren. The Privilege to Keep and Bear Arms. Connecticut Quorum Books, 1989 4 Hickok, Eugene Jr., ed. The Bill of Rights master copy Meaning and Current Understanding. Virginia University Press of Virginia, 19915 Kruschke, Earl PHD. Gun Control A recognition Handbook. California ABC-CLIO Inc., 19956 Image on the cover page taken from TIME. photographer unknown.7 Prune Yard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74, 81 (1980)8 Zimring, Franklin E., Gun Control. cyclopaedia Encarta 1993-1997 Microsoft Corporation.