The Second Amendment of the Constitution of the U.S.A

Without guns how will we protect our homes, our families, and other things we care for? On December 15, 1791, our Founding Father decided that it was important to make sure every citizen of the United States of America has the right to Bear Arms. The Second Amendment of the Constitution of the U.S.A 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.’ To me, this means that every person in the U.S.A has the right to own guns and that the amendment shall not be changed. Modern debates about the Second Amendment have focused on whether the amendment protects the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. People think that because of the school shooting around the world that no one should be able to have guns.

Pennsylvania was the first state to declare that people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves, and the state. In Massachusetts, Samuel Adams proposed that peaceable citizens have a right to keep their own arms. The Second Amendment protects individual rights and that Legislative dispute was subject to Judicial review. The Second Amendment provides U.S. citizens with the right to bear arms. James Madison originally proposed the Second Amendment shortly after the Constitution was officially confirmed as a way to provide more power to state militias, which today are considered the National Guard. It was deemed a compromise between Federalists, those who supported the Constitution as it was ratified, and the anti-Federalists, those who supported states having more power. Having just used guns and other arms to ward off the English, the amendment was originally created to give citizens the opportunity to fight back against a brutal federal government. In 1791, there was a lot of thought put into the Second Amendment.

The Founding Fathers were right to have made sure that every citizen of the USA had the right to own a gun. The US has laws about what type of gun you can own, but the Second Amendment says that we have the right to own a gun. This is saying that people can own machine guns, sawed-off shotguns, and any other damn gun they want to own. Modern debates about the Second Amendment have focused on whether the amendment protects a private right of individuals to keep and bear arms, or a right that can be exercised only through militia organizations like the National Guard. One issue being discussed is whether the Second Amendment recognizes the right of each citizen to keep and bear arms, or whether the right belongs solely to state governments and empowers each state to maintain a military force. The debate has resulted in odd political alignments which in turn have caused the Second Amendment to be described recently as the most embarrassing provision of the Bill of Rights.

The Second Amendment says nothing about what type of gun you can and can not own. To be fair back in 1791 they didn’t have machine guns and sawed-off shotguns. The people had bayonets and pistols, not the more lethal weapons we have today. Our guns are way more harmful and more efficient. In American today society thinks that we have the right to own certain guns. However, the amendment says that we have the right to own a gun. Also back in 1791, we didn’t have machine guns and sawed-off shotguns. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. People break this every day and use a gun for harmful purposes even though it isn’t for self-defense. Even though that there are laws that are supposed to stop these things like a school shooting. The laws don’t stop these things at all from happening. The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Second Amendment this term was precipitated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit’s decision.

As technology gets more and more advanced we need more laws and to control people who have guns. Know one but our founding fathers knew exactly what the second amendment is supposed to mean. One of the biggest challenges in interpreting a centuries-old document is that the meanings of words change or diverge. In other words, the amendment didn’t mean the state was controlling the militia in a certain way, but rather that the militia was prepared to do its duty. Part of the miserable ritual that follows American mass shootings is the lament that nothing can be done unless we get rid of the Second Amendment. The courts have not interpreted the Second Amendment beyond the right of owning a handgun for self-defense and, in fact, of owning that handgun in your home. Having guns in your home is for your own purpose and no one else’s knowledge. If we get rid of the second amendment then people would use guns for killing other people, shooting schools, ect… We do not want this in the US. The United States v. Cruikshank was one supreme court case. The case arose during a disputed gubernatorial election between Reconstruction Republicans and Democrats in Louisiana. Both the Democratic and Republican candidates for governor claimed victory. President Ulysses S. Grant sent in federal troops to support the Republican government, but Democrats refused to acknowledge their loss.

The state’s nearly all-black militia gathered at the Colfax County courthouse to prevent the Democratic candidates from assuming local offices. Members of the White League, an armed paramilitary group of white Democrats, attacked and killed more than a hundred militiamen, an event which became known as the Colfax County Massacre. The result of the case was that the white league won. The Supreme Court ruled that the right to keep and bear arms is an ‘unincorporated’ right, and only Congress was barred from restricting the Second Amendment, not states or individuals. Presser v. Illinois (1886) was another supreme court case. Presser and four hundred of his fellow militiamen paraded through Chicago armed with rifles, he was arrested and charged with violating the state’s laws against military organizations. Presser argued that the state’s law was unconstitutional, as the Second Amendment granted him the right to form and maintain his own ‘well regulated’ militia.The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment it had made in the Cruikshank case: the Second Amendment did not apply to the states and so the states were free to regulate or ban private militias and guns in any way they chose.

Presser and four hundred of his fellow militiamen paraded through Chicago armed with rifles, he was arrested and charged with violating the state’s laws against military organizations. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment it had made in the Cruikshank case. The Second Amendment did not apply to the states and so, the states were free to regulate or ban private militias and guns in any way they chose. The ruling means that people can have or not have their own armies. The ruling then makes us think that it is okay to have our own personal armies and guns. Today the amendment has made its way to the supreme court because of people who go and shoot up schools.Arkansas Constitution guarantees ‘constitutional carry’ of guns. About 75 people gathered in downtown El Dorado on Labor Day for the rally hosted by the Union County TEA Party Patriots, set to begin at 4 p.m. The first two scheduled speakers, state Sen.

Trent Garner, R-El Dorado, and Salvation Army Lt. Charles Smith, were unable to attend Monday’s rally and Morgan said she ran through rain and arrived on the square at 4:45 p.m. This story relates to the Second amendment because Morgan is about keeping gun rights. The Second Amendment doesn’t give anything to resolve this issue. My generation should care about this amendment because one day people in the US might not be able to have guns at all. The Amendment in the future will ether allow people to have guns or not. I think that if someone takes the second amendment to the supreme court the supreme court will rule for the amendment and keep it the way it is. My life has been improved by the second amendment because then I have something to look forward to. This amendment could either let me be able to let me own a gun or not.

The Second Amendment’s right “to keep and bear arms” has been among the most controversial—and least understood—rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Did the Founders intend to safeguard an individual right or a collective right? How did England’s efforts to ban firearms in colonial Boston shape the Founders’ views on how to protect citizens from government tyranny? What kinds of gun restrictions, if any, are consistent with the Founders’ aims? How exactly has gun control in the United States affected violent crime rates? With the Supreme Court’s review of the Washington, D.C., handgun ban, along with recent shootings on school campuses and elsewhere, these questions are more timely than ever. Stephen P. Halbrook provides the fullest account yet of the Founders’ views in his new book, The Founders’ Second Origins of the Right to Bear Arms.

Criminologist and attorney Don B. Kates, Jr., author of Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control, will discuss what effects gun control has on violent crime. Please join us as Halbrook and Kate’s examine the Second Amendment, then and now. The principal debate surrounding the Second Amendment concerns whether the right to use and buy guns belongs to individuals or only to a militia. Although the courts generally have held that the right applies to individuals, they have permitted the government to limit some rights of gun manufacturers, owners and sellers. Today, questions about the Second Amendment center on bans on assault weapons, mandatory background checks, waiting periods, and other restrictions on gun sales or use. With the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment and subsequent Supreme Court rulings, states were prohibited from making or enforcing laws that infringe on most of the rights set out in the Bill of Rights. Two subsequent Supreme Court decisions clarified the Second Amendment as it relates to states and the federal district. As a result, gun control legislation varies widely among the 50 states.