Essay - Right to Bear Arms Should Civil Society Have the Right...


1 2
Copyright Notice

Right to bear arms

Should civil society have the right to bear arms? A Critical Look on the Issue of Individualism and Collectivism in the Interpretation ***** the Second *****mendment

In ***** United States Constitution, the Second Amendment contains ***** rights of citizens as individuals, of which the 'right to bear arms' is considered part ***** ***** conditions stated. The issue of a citizen's right ***** bear arms, or guns, is a debate that h***** remained unresolved, especially if a controversial or celebrated case concerning the right to bear arms is in focus.

This research provides an alternative way of look*****g at this issue, wherein ***** ***** of the right to bear arms is argued based on the judicial system's interpret*****ion ***** th***** *****: whether the right to bear arms should be interpreted based on an individualist or collectivist point of view.

The thesis that will ***** discussed in this paper assumes the st*****ce that the right to bear ***** should be ***** on a collectivist view, for every individual right, if subjected ***** interpretati*****s favoring ***** purposes only, would defeat ***** objectives of the *****mation ***** the Constitution itself. Thus, in accordance to the objectives of the Constitution, which is to guide both civil society ***** ***** political system in governance and ***** ensure social order, the right to *****ar arms must be interpreted in the context of the individual vis-a-vis his/her rights' effect on ***** *****. Thus, ***** the right ***** bear arms caused or ***** cause detriment to the civil society, *****n this ***** should not be ***** an argument for an individual to still attain ***** right, and held not liable ***** whatever detriment the attainment of such right has for the civil ***** or one's community.

***** point of view was subsisted in Busch's (2003) analysis of ***** case United ***** vs. Emerson, where***** the issue of the right to ***** arms surfaced. In analyzing the Court's decision to defer Emerson's ***** ***** *****ar arms, Busch stated that such decision was made because the Court's decision was "collective" in nature, where***** the welfare ***** the civil society, ***** ***** danger posed by Emerson became the contentions against his *****. In asserting that the right to bear arms must be interpreted in ***** ***** point of view, the author rationalized that "***** more collectively the right is interpreted, the more broadly Congress can legislate to restrict the ***** to ********** *****" (347). In effect, what made sense in Busch's analysis is that this particular right, as ***** in the Constitution, must be ***** ***** the proper context. Thus, ***** ownership of a gun for militi***** purposes, whether he has the intent to use this or not, is a threat to civil society; hence, ***** ***** decision to deny him his rights to bear arms is considered just, in the collectivist's point of view.

***** (2003) argued against Busch's position regarding the interpretation of ***** right. For him, the right to bear ***** is considered part of

. . . . [END OF RESEARCH PAPER PREVIEW]

Download full paper (and others like it)    |    Order a brand new, custom paper

Other topics that might interest you:

© 2001–2017   |   Dissertations on Right to Bear Arms Should Civil Society Have the Right   |   Book Report Example