The Second Amendment and the Right to Bare Arms - Research Proposal Example

 The Second Amendment and the Right to Bare Arms The second Amendment of the Constitution protects an individual’s rights to “bare” or keep firearms as a means of lawful protection in the event that a military or militia is not established or is not functional, “The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms”(Supreme Court of the United States, 2008) . In the recent case of the District of Columbia versus Heller, the District of Columbia stuck down a ban on hand guns in a five to four supreme court ruling. Prior to the ruling, it was not lawful to carry an unlicensed firearm, specifically a handgun. The ruling in favor of legalizing handguns was groundbreaking and served to challenge the hopes of many that America would soon embrace national gun control. The core of the debate on gun control and the second amendment has to do with interpretations of the second amendment as well as America’s gun epidemic. Individuals who support the right to bare arms, feel that the right to own a gun is fundamental such as the right to freedom of speech or the right to vote. The problem however, is that gun violence is one of the leading causes of death in America and has only increased over the past few decades. The case of the District of Columbia versus Heller brought light to the fact that this particular area of the country held the strictest of gun regulations, “The landmark ruling overturned the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns, the strictest gun-control law in the country, and appeared certain to usher in a fresh round of litigation over gun rights throughout the country”(Greenhouse, 2008). Ultimately, the decision of the court stated that it was not the responsibility or within the jurisdiction of the court to reject or ignore the second amendment. On this basis, the decision to strike down the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns was made. In the case of the District of columbia versus Heller, a special police officer is forbidden to keep a handgun in his home and therefore contends the rigid D.C. gun laws which feasibly contradict the allowances made by the second amendment, “Respondent Dick Heller is a D. C. special police officer authorized to carry a handgun while on duty at the Federal Judicial Center. He applied for a registration certificate for a handgun that he wished to keep at home, but the District refused. He thereafter filed a lawsuit in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia seeking, on Second Amendment grounds, to enjoin the city from enforcing the bar on the registration of handguns, the licensing requirement insofar as it prohibits the carrying of a firearm in the home without a license, and the trigger-lock requirement insofar as it prohibits the use of ‘functional firearms’ within the home”(Supreme Court of the United States, 2008). Heller’s challenege of the rigid D.C. gun laws was a groundbreaking case which reaffirmed the allowances set for th by the second amendment, for all Americans to rightfully keep a handgun in their posession for the purposes of self defense. One of the main arguments made by those who oppose the legalizing of handguns and firearms is that the Second Amendment allows for citizens to own firearms for the purpose of self defense in the absence of an organized military or militia. Obviosly, we are livinh in a time where America has one of the largest and most sophisticated militaries in the world making a clear and present need for the ownership of personal firearms null and void. The Supreme Court however, disagrees with this interpretation as they ruled in favor of the removal of the ban on private ownership of firearms in the case of the District of Columbia versus Heller. Thos decision would be thje first of its kind in 70 years, since the time of the last case involving the dispute over whether it is Constitutiomally allowable for private citizens to own handguns or firearms. The District of Columbia firearm law actually dates back to the year 1976 and not only prohibits the ownership of personal handguns but also dictates that rifles and other larger firearms must be kept disassembled or with specific safety locks in oplace when in a private residence. Because this law is so specific and strict, it has come as a great surprise to many Americans that the Supreme Court has seen fit to strike it down and declare it to be unconstitutional. Most cases of the past which have been similar to the one involving the District of Columbia and Dick Heller, have resulted with the courts in favor f the “collective” ownership or possesion of guns as opposed to the personal rights of indiviausl citizens owning guns. The Heller case was so incredibly groundbreaking because it actually ended with a ruling in favor of private citizens owning guns as per the Second Amendent of the Constitution which might have otherwise been interpreted as only allowing an organized militia to legally own guns instead of private citizens. The NRA (National Rigle Association) has been integral in promoting the notion that American s should fight to preserve their rights to won handguns and firearms. In light of highly publicized catastrophes however, such as the one which took place at Columbine Highschool in Littleton Colorado in 1999. Since this particular incident nd a few others like it, gun legislation has been challenged and gun regulations have heightened in hopes of keeping firearms out of the hands of children and teens. Incidentally, not two weeks after the Columbine masacre, Charleton Heston, spokesman for the NRA, visited Calorado for a rally in favor of gun ownership. The NRA came under a great deal of persecution for such an insensitive and thoghtless display of audacity, but still continued to rally heavily for the American right to bare arms. As it stands, the case of the District of Columbia versus Heller remains one that threatens the ideology that perhaps anti gun legislation can be passed and enforced nationwide thuis decreasing the annual deaths in America which can be attributed to gun violence. Incidentally, prior to the verdict in this particular case, when the implementation of a ban on guns was firmly in place, the city still had one of the highest crime rates when compared nationally to other cities, “Few would cite D.C.’s gun ban as proof that gun control leads to crime control, as the city continues to have one of the nation’s highest rates of violent crime. Even some gun-control advocates don’t support it”(Los Angelis Times, 2008). Fundamentally, the case itself has been so controversial because it has primarily decided to interperit the Second Amendment of the Constitution in a manner which is somewhat suprising to many, “The case has drawn wide attention not because of the city’s law itself, but because the court may decide for the first time whether gun rights are truly protected by the Constitution, just like the right to free speech or the right to freely practice your religion”(The Los Angelis Times, 2008). Sonce the decision made by the Supreme Court in this particular case, the general interpretation of the Second Amendment is such that private citizens are entitled to own firearms without being a part of a larger organized militia. Interestingly, the stringent law in place in regards to guns in the District of Columbia, did little to regulate their level of violent crimes which took place every year. It is believed by some that the level of violent crimes may have increased due to the illegal gun trade going on in the city due to the difficulty in attaining firearms legally. The case of Heller versus the city was certainly unique as Dick Heller was in fact a law enforcement agent who was unable to retain a permit to own a firearm within the privacy of his own home for the purposes of protecting himself and his family. Had Heller not challenged the law which had been in place for a relatively long period of time, there may not have been such a great deal of controversy surrounding the correct interpretation of the Second Amendment of the Constitution. At this point in time, it looks as though there is little chance og seeing a wave of gun control sweeping the nation. Instead, it is probable tht the allowance for individuals to own and bare arms will be systematically preserved by the highest courts in the land. Works Cited: ---------------, 2008, “The justices’ decision on the individual right to keep and bear arms under the 2nd Amendment could reverberate throughout the U.S.”, The Los Angelis Times, retrieved 8 August, 2008 from website at: http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/17/nation/na-guns17 Biskupic, John. “Do you have a legal right to own a gun?”, USA Today, retrieved 8 August, 2008 from website at: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-02-26-guns-cover_n.htm Greenhouse, Linda, 2008, “Gun case causes Bush Administration rift”, The New York Times, retrieved 8 August, 2008 from website at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/17/washington/17scotus.html?_r=2&ref=us &oref=slogin&oref=slogin Greenhouse, Linda. 2008, “Justices rule for individual gun rights”, The New York Times, retrieved 8 August, 2008 from website at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/washington/27scotuscnd.html?_r=2&hp =&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1218223002-hzat1307ribXBUZg2BXIDQ Greenhouse, Linda. 2008, “Do you have a right to bear arms?”, The New York Times upfront, retrieved 8 August, 2008 from website at: http://teacher.scholastic.com/scholasticnews/indepth/upfront/features/index.a sp?article=f011408_Guns Lund Ph.D., Nelson. March 14, 2008, “The Second Amendment comes before the Supreme Court: The issues and the arguments”, Web Memo-The Heritage Foundation, retrieved 8 August, 2008 from website at: http://www.heritage.org/Research/LegalIssues/upload/wm_1851.pdf Mooney, Chris, 2002, “jumping the gun”, The American Prophet, retrieved 8 August, 2008 from website at: http://prospect.org/cs/articles?article=jumping_the_gun Oyez, US Supreme Court Media, 2007-2008, “The District of Columbia versus Heller”, retrieved 8 August, 2008, from website at: http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2007/2007_07_290/ Reynolds, Glenn Harrold, 2008, “The year of the gun: The Second Amendment rights and the Supreme Court”, Texas Law Review Forthcoming, retrieved 8August, 2008 from website at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084924 Supreme Court of the United States, Argued March 18, 2008-decided June 26, 2008, “District of Columbia Et Al vs. Heller” no. 07-290, retrieved 8 August, 2008 from website at: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf Read More