Why Is The Second Amendment Important

​In his book ‘Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America,’ Wrinkler tried to present an unbiased view towards the second amendment in the light of historical events and landmark cases that has tried to challenge or obtain the court’s interpretation. One of such cases is the ‘District of Columbia v. Heller’ case, which was argued and decided in 2008 (Supreme Court of the United States). For several instances, the provision in the Second Amendment that pertains to the right of an individual to bear arms has been contested. In fact, the clause, which 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”, is perhaps the most misconstrued clause in the American constitution (Supreme Court of the United States). Adding to the significance of this highly debatable clause is the fact that a flurry of gun related incidences has happened in the United States in the past that has taken many lives including that of children. Among the most significant authors that has attempted to answer the question or at least laid out the possibilities regarding the second amendment is Adam Wrinkler. In light of Winkler’s arguments as well as with other sources, this paper will examine the historical

The Second Amendment remains one of the most controversial pieces of legislation in the contemporary America. The onset of the controversy regarding gun ownership rights can be traced back to the nineteenth century. Some of the major events that shaped the debate on gun ownership include Shay’s Rebellion and the dispute between federalists and anti-federalists. Slavery and the abolition movement also shaped the debate on gun ownership. In order to understand the bitter controversy that accrues from the Second Amendment, Saul Cornell provides a detailed analysis of the history that brought forth the contentious

The Second Amendment to the U.S Constitution is fiercely debated and interpreted differently among American citizens and argued with between the Legislative and Judicial branches of our government. “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,” (Brooks). Because of the Second Amendment, citizens have the right to possess firearms and use them for protection. When researching the origin of the Second Amendment, its modern applications, and its relevance in today’s society, one can determine the Second Amendment’s current implications on today’s society.

Constitution of United States of America written 1789. Second amendment is regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state. The right of people to keep and have bear arms shall not be infringed. The issues the federal Judge have with 2nd amendment is that it doesn't cover weapons are either military in nature or resemble military weapons. If people can't have guns and weapons to defend themselves or just to have guns to feel protceted. The judges say the military weapons or okay than the people should have military weapons since the military weapons are different from bear arms. The enlightened judge doesn't like the language of the constitution because they think it's outdated and doesn't go right with our modern life today.

"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." These are the words of the second amendment in the United States Constitution. The amendments guarantee america citizens the right to bear arms. This right grants men have the right to bear arms their for protection or for the militia they were served in. This amendment today should grant all civilians to own guns.

Written in 1789 by James Madison, the Second Amendment is one that most passionate Americans today are very quick to defend or argue against. The Second Amendment is one of the most controversial and complex amendments in the Bill of Rights. One of those debates includes the actual meaning behind James Madison’s contradictory sentence. The question that often rises is was the Second Amendment created for the protection of the all people or solely for the establishment of a centralized military. The Second Amendment has undergone several changes which established stricter regulations and more clarification but however it is ultimately still controversial in modern society as it is unclear in wording and meaning.

Patrick 2nd amendment Research Paper 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." How the second amendment was created. The idea of bearing arms was not created by the US government, instead it was a concept made by the British.

The context of the Second Amendment has frequently been debated in American history. Namely, the constitutionality of issuing restrictive laws on gun control based on the Second Amendment has caused controversy. In the last fifty years the prevalence of this topic has grown dramatically. With the increase in recent tragic events, such as school shootings and homicides, guns laws have become a common topic. Gun control activists have often sought stricter restrictions and laws to prevent citizens from purchasing and possessing guns in general. While there are many interesting arguments on both sides of the issue, it poses an important question on our inherent rights, as guaranteed

For more than two hundred years there was never a debate about the exact meaning of the second amendment. Most recently the arguments have become focused on if it protects a right of individuals to keep and bear arms or, is it a right of the states to maintain organized militias like the National Guard. The only mentions based on early debates even questioned if it added anything to the original Constitution (1). The thoughts evolved from being either a weapon was used to protect oneself or as a tool, which is indispensable in daily life and therefore as arbitrary as a kitchen knife in either argument. Today the debate has shifted due to subsequent developments in the evolution of Constitution law.

These gun control advocates argue that the Second Amendment grew out of the colonists’ fear of standing armies and their belief that having militias that were composed of ordinary citizens was the surest way of maintaining their freedom (3).

The second amendment of the 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.” (Cornell Law) For over fifty years, the amendment has been interpreted to the courts that people individually do not have the right to own gun, but rather that this right is to be regulated by legislatives on the federal,

The Second Amendment States: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a

“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. (Brooks, 2013)”

In recent years, there have been many stories of shootings taken place across various parts of the United States, all of which bring up the highly volatile topic of gun control. Unlike many other wealthy countries, such as the United Kingdom, Japan, Canada, and Australia, where gun ownership is strictly regulated, by in large-the US has very little universal gun control laws throughout the nation. This great controversy is based on the Constitutional right of the Second Amendment, stating, “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.” Though this is a Constitutional right, unlike many other Amendments, understanding they were written in

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