For example, recent calls to control and even ban gun use as a response to increasing violence and murder in schools that involve guns such as the the recent shooting in Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown inadvertently run counter to the basic Bill of Right of the Second Amendment. This is not the first however that this Amendment had been challenged and in fact, there were several court decisions made in the past that undermined this provision due to its unclear coverage and extent. For example, we can cite the U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876) case whereby it was often cited out of context with the claim otherwise that Second Amendment is "is not a right granted by the Constitution" (Guncite.com, 2010). This out of context interpretation also resulted in other flawed state regulation such as a provision in the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 law in the District of Columbia that requires all firearms including rifles and shotguns to be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock. The Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 also contained a provision that prohibits the residents of the District of Columbia from owning handguns except those that were registered prior to 1975. As expected, the law was challenged and was elevated in the Supreme Court. Until finally on June 26, 2008 the Supreme Court made a decision to affirm the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Heller v. District of Columbia. The Court of Appeals had initially made a decision to remove two provisions in the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 as unconstitutional. The provisions that were removed as unconstitutional were the provision that prohibits the residence of District of Columbia from the ownership of handguns except prior 1975 and the provision that requires all firearms to be "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock" at all times. The decision elaborated that the Second Amendment “protects an individual right to bear arms” further stating its decision was "premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government” (Library of Congress). Further, this right help preserve a citizen militia “the activities [the Amendment] protects are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or intermittent enrollment in the militia." (Guncite.com). With regard to handgun ownership, the Supreme Court thus decided that the District of Columbia cannot prohibit its citizen from owning such as guaranteed by the right enunciated in the Second Amendment albeit subjected to restrictions. The specific provision of Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 that specified that all firearms including rifles and shotguns be "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock" was also struck down as unconstitutional. Although the District asserted that there are exceptions to this provision, it still meant to a total prohibition on functional firearms that would be used for self defense. The court further exegete; Section 7-2507.02, like the bar on carrying a pistol within the home, amounts to a complete prohibition on the lawful use of handguns for self-defense. As such, we hold it unconstitutional. Further, in the original U.S. v. Cruikshank in 1876 case which is often misinterpreted
Name Professor Class Date Second Amendment Second Amendment: its coverage and limit The Second Amendment contained in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the United States declared 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” (U.S…
The reconstructive amendments denied the state the right to deprive any individual of their liberty, life or even property without following the legal process. It also prohibited the states from denying equal protection for any individual within its jurisdiction.
It was created as America declared its independence from its parent nation of England as a way of creating its own direction, with language and concepts that were unfamiliar to the parent nation. It is the document on which the rights of the American citizens are based, and represents many important principles, and is the foundation upon which the freedom of the country is based and considered to be the founding document of the nation.
I. Introduction II. Why there should be a Ban on Rifles and other Guns III. How does the Ban of Rifles affect the Second Amendment IV. The Goal of the Ban V. Conclusion VI. Works Cited Introduction The debate on gun control in United States has now reached its maximum point.
The Fourth Amendment was developed as a reaction to the manipulation of the writ of assistance. The writ of assistance is a form of all-purpose search warrant, in the American Revolution. Seizure and search, including arrest, should be restricted in extent with regard to specified information given to the issuing court, normally by a law enforcement agent.
Second Amendment and Gun Laws Introduction The issue of civilian gun ownership has caused a very heated debate and must be looked at in a very critical manner. Needless to say, there are those who believe that civilians should not be allowed to legally own a gun.
However, under certain terms the limitation of these rights is regarded as necessary so that other rights are secured. Such case exists in regard to the right of US citizens to have access to ammunition. The particular issue is set under examination in this paper.
The National Rifle Association has grown to be the most influential lobby group in the United States today because of its vehement opposition to gun control. This paper will not pretend to provide the ultimate solution to this profound
The particular issue is set under examination in this paper. Emphasis is given to the following question: can state and the federal government set limits to the access to ammunition under the constitution? Since ammunition cannot