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 *****? A Critical Look on the Issue of Individualism and Collectivism in ***** Interpretation of the Second Amendment

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

***** research provides an alternative way of looking at this issue, wherein ***** issue of the right to bear arms is argued based on the judicial system's interpretation ***** this right: whether the right to ***** arms should be interpreted based on an individualist ***** collectivist point of view.

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

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

Spitzer (2003) argued ***** Busch's position regarding the interpretation ***** t***** righ*****. For him, the right to bear ***** is ***** part of

. . . . [END OF ESSAY PREVIEW]

Download complete paper (and others like it)    |    Order a brand new, customized paper

Other topics that might interest you:

© 2001–2016   |   Term Papers about Right to Bear Arms Should Civil Society Have the Right   |   Research Papers Model