Second Amendment Term Paper

Pages: 9 (2640 words)  ·  Bibliography Sources: 1+  ·  Level: College Senior  ·  Topic: Law - Constitutional Law  ·  Buy This Paper

SAMPLE EXCERPT:

[. . .] "

This is exactly the same although in not so clearer way as to the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms is not a right but a privilege and the law upholds that it shall deem when it becomes a right and when it becomes illegal. Kates has totally missed the idea in his zealous attitude for the right to bear arms.

In "The Embarrassing Second Amendment" by Sanford Levinson we see an analogy of how two Americans might draw the Bill of Rights as a map, by taking liberal and member of the New Right there we see two different perspectives. It is interesting to not how he sees the two attitudes of each with the Second Amendment being a major road for the Right Winger.

Levinson looks at the Second Amendment as being a non-starter when it comes to academic papers or reviews. LaRue succinctly states "the second Amendment is not taken seriously by most scholars" (cited in Sandford).

However, unlike the Justices, Law professors and lawyers who care little for amendment there are many who feel deeply about it. The National Rifle Association, previously mentioned above concerning the posters of Chinese students feels very strong about this amendment. Furthermore, there are several members of the senate who feel very strongly that the right to bear arms should be made a right.

In looking at Levinson's paper it is clearly a work that brings forth both sides of the argument of the second amendment. He provides clarity and understanding as to what to amendment means to those member of the public and also those who do not wish to have this right repealed.

Levinson looks at the ideals of Professor Cress and how the right to bear arms would be placed in a community role rather than that of an individual right, Levinson further looks at how this idea of the community and its relationship can be explained.

Levinson looks deep into the past for the meaning of certain words such as militia, here he discovers that the term was not of a limited reference as many modern analysts would give it. It can be argued that militia could mean community. If this is the situation then the senate would have to redress the second amendment and maybe make an amendment to this.

By looking at Prudentialiasm and analysing the amendment along with the historical circumstances as to its adoption there can be a strong argument for the second amendment. However, with a prudent mind and being attentive to the practicalities of the second amendment then the clear and simple argument would be for gun control.

Justice Powell stated: "[w]ith respect to handguns...to sporting rifles and shot guns it is not easy to understand why the Second Amendment, or the notion of liberty, should be viewed as creating a right to own or carry a weapon that contributes so directly to the shocking number of murders in our society" (cited in Levinson).There can be very little to disagree with Powell about why should hand guns be allowed in society when they have caused so much death within a society.

However, Levinson also argues that it may be prudent to suggest that times have changed then the outmoded arguments are just that why not allow citizens to have weapons to protect their homes from others who have weapons illegally. Sadly within this argument there can be no ending, it is always a case of stipulating where the clarification of where gun control stops. Move the law once and it will change again and again.

In looking at the article by Robert Cottrol and Raymond Diamond "The Second Amendment: An Afro- Americanist reconsideration" we can see the argument that the debate that has been argued for decades will never end. The second Amendment is a controversial act that will never be finalised until a case illustrates the need for a change. This will probably never happen for the second amendment.

However as the debate for gun control rages so to will the debate over the amendment which has been fought and discussed not only in the courts but also in the press and the senate.

Can there be an amendment to the militia term or will it remain just so? If a change happens how it affect the community and the laws? In this the laws will be more severe, the penalties for murder and death will have to be extreme and severe, there will be more guns on the streets and probably a moving of the goal posts on what guns are carried. From hand guns to semi-automatic and finally to fully automatic weapons.

Society has no need to be armed. They are protected by the police and in event of national emergency the national guard, the new militia. Therefore, when the debate for gun control continually gets argued by senseless lawyers who feel that their client has been wrongfully arrested for carrying a weapon and the courts return to the common reply for the argument of the second amendment then it is clear that the lawyers do not learn their lessons, have not studied the legal theory and terminology of legal documents or in many cases they are plain pig headed and want to controversial.

The second amendment was put in place for a reason just like the other amendments, it has a purpose. Its purpose is to provide a clause that allows members of the militia to be armed when it is needed.

This in its turn is on the same lines as the English Bill of right article seven. "That the Subjects which are Protestants may have Arms for their Defence suitable to their Conditions and as allowed by Law." If we then compare this to the second Amendment "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" they say the same thing.

As stated above the laws of both countries follow a similar path and in their own way have the same ideology to protect the community by use of the militia in the defence of property as long as it is legal.

Looking back at history we can see why the law was brought in. There is no reason why it should be changed. Therefore, for any person who pleads the second amendment as litigating circumstances needs to re read his law books, or read the articles laid out by the Justices of the court and learn by their comments.

In looking at the five articles we can see that each persons interpretation is different yet at the same time they agree on many moot points. They also all agree that… [END OF PREVIEW]

Four Different Ordering Options:

?
Which Option Should I Choose?

1.  [This option is temporarily unavailable.]

or

2.  [This option is temporarily unavailable.]

or

3.  Access all 175,000+ papers:  $41.97/mo

(Already a member?  Click to download the paper!)

or

4.  Let us write a NEW paper for you!

Ask Us to Write a New Paper
Most popular!

2nd Amendment the Right to Bear Arms Term Paper


Amendments US Constitution Term Paper


We Should Abolish the 2nd Amendment Term Paper


1st and 2nd Amendments Term Paper


Policy-Making Issues and the Second Amendment Research Paper


View 1,000+ other related papers  >>

Cite This Term Paper:

APA Format

Second Amendment.  (2002, September 30).  Retrieved February 18, 2019, from https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/second-amendment-united/7916657

MLA Format

"Second Amendment."  30 September 2002.  Web.  18 February 2019. <https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/second-amendment-united/7916657>.

Chicago Format

"Second Amendment."  Essaytown.com.  September 30, 2002.  Accessed February 18, 2019.
https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/second-amendment-united/7916657.