Scholars Debate 2nd Amendment to US Constitution
This article talks about the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, proclaiming the right to bear arms. As a general statement, the Supreme Court has ruled “Americans have a constitutional right to keep guns in their homes for self-defense” in 2008 (Morales). However, the article briefly mentioned a shooting that occurred in Colorado, and the author commented how there were few calls concerning an increase in gun control. This leads up to how the main debate in the article centers on the two different sides of the controversial topic of gun control. Those who favor individual rights mention that when the Constitution was created, this amendment wanted to protect the rights Americans had when they were still Englishmen. The American Revolution was brought up, and mentions how colonists were deprived of their freedoms, including the right to own firearms. For the people that don’t consider individual gun ownership to be the main issue, they are more concerned with maintaining regulation of the firearms. If the country went back to the original meaning of the amendment, society would be more militarized and firearms would be inspected more regularly with proper training. The debate is between those wanting to emphasize the right to own guns with “the right to bear arms,” and those wanting to regulate gun ownership focus on “a well regulated militia.” Both of these ideas were included in the Constitution to serve different purposes, and both are meant to be taken seriously.
My thesis states that part of the American experience is having rights without the freedom to use them. This article demonstrates that people have “the right to bear arms,” but that there is a lot of controversy over how regulated and restricted those rights should be. Some people want more gun control, while others feel their rights are being infringed when there are new gun regulations put in place. The regulations are limiting the American citizen’s “right to bear arms,” and to a degree, contradicting the Constitution. The debate shows how people have the right to individually own guns, but many people want to take this right away. The limitations on gun ownership through regulations shows that people have the right to own guns, but that right is being restricted.
My thesis states that part of the American experience is having rights without the freedom to use them. This article demonstrates that people have “the right to bear arms,” but that there is a lot of controversy over how regulated and restricted those rights should be. Some people want more gun control, while others feel their rights are being infringed when there are new gun regulations put in place. The regulations are limiting the American citizen’s “right to bear arms,” and to a degree, contradicting the Constitution. The debate shows how people have the right to individually own guns, but many people want to take this right away. The limitations on gun ownership through regulations shows that people have the right to own guns, but that right is being restricted.