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


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 ***** the Second *****mendment

In ***** United States Constitution, the Second Amendment contains ***** *****s of citizens as individuals, of which the 'right to ***** arms' is considered part of ***** conditions stated. The issue ***** 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.

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

***** *****sis ***** will be discussed in this paper assumes the st*****ce that the right ***** bear arms should be based on a collectivist *****, f***** every individual right, if subjected to interpretati*****s favoring individual purposes only, would defeat the objectives of the formation of the Constitution itself. Thus, in accordance to ***** objectives of the Constitution, which is ***** guide both ***** society ***** the political system ***** governance and to ensure social order, ***** right ***** *****ar ***** must be interpreted in the context of the *****dividual vis-a-vis his/her rights' effect on the *****. Thus, ***** the right to ********** arms caused or will cause detriment to the civil society, *****n this right 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 *****e's community.

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

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

. . . . [END OF DISSERTATION PREVIEW]

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

Other topics that might interest you:

© 2001–2016   |   Term Papers about Right to Bear Arms Should Civil Society Have the Right   |   Book Report Example