The second amendment 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.". If the clauses were split that the people have the rights to bear arms, but if you take the clauses as one statement it can be argued that the right should only apply to the militia and not simply the people. So therefore even simply the right for people to bear arms is a place for dispute. This is simply skimming the surface of what is disputed today people debate whether this amendment covers all firearms or does it only apply to some and does it give reference to present day weapons.
If the second amendment does not give the right to bear arms though in all situations for example in Heller vs. District of Columbia, Heller opposed federal law and fought for his right to bear arms though the state or in this case district which he lived in the law said that he couldn't bear a handgun. Though the laws said he couldn't he went to court with it and won. Therefore even though the second amendment may say you have the right to bear arms you may not have the right to have certain weapons and use certain weapons in certain states.
No comments:
Post a Comment