The Second Amendment: A Blessing or A Curse?

The Second Amendment: A Blessing or a Curse?

When it comes to the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, is it a blessing or a curse to all Americans? Most would argue that firearms have protected our country during wars and saved millions of lives. However, others think that weapons have lead to many horrible acts of terror and shootings in our country. Which side do you choose? Do you think the Second Amendment for our countries sake, is a blessing or a curse?

“A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no just government should refuse.” (Sea of Liberty). This quote was spoken by Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, and why he supports the additions of the Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution. Madison, believed that institutions were more effective than words in protecting people’s individual rights. Jefferson’s argument helped convince Madison to change his mind.

Within the Bill of Rights, there are the ten most important amendments of the United States Constitution. (Bill of Rights Institute). Among these is the Second Amendment. This amendment states that, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of people to keep and bear arms, should not be infringed.” Guns are a part of every citizen’s daily life. Their popularity in movies reflects the reality of the culture today. People are used to living around people with weapons. People believe that this right makes society a dangerous place. Some say that the getting rid of the second amendment will lower crime rates and save more lives. The truth is, that eliminating the second amendment of the Constitution won’t stop or reduce crime. It does help people protect their lives, and the fact that it is a part of the Bill of Rights, makes it sacred and can and should not be changed.

Once again, the second amendment states, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of people to keep and bear arms, should not be infringed.” (Bill of Rights Institute). This type of language has created a large amount of debate about the amendments intentions. But on the other hand, when it states “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” creates the individual rights for citizens of the Unites States. Under the “individual rights theory” the U.S. Constitution restricts governmental officials from restricting firearm possession. A collective rights theory, of the second amendment supports that citizens do not have individual rights to possess a firearm. Local, state and federal governmental bodies do possess the authority to conceal a firearm without associating a constitutional right.

In 1939, the U.S. Supreme Court considered the court case of United States v. Miller.

The Court adopted a collective rights approach in this case. It established that Congress could legalize a sawed-off shotgun under the National Firearms Act of 1934. (United States v Miller). The evidence did not suggest that the shotgun “has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia…” (Oyez). This firearm standard stood for about 74 years, when in 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court revisited the issue in the case of District of Columbia v Heller. The Supreme Court heard Second Amendment challenges to Washington, D.C.’s old ban on handgun possession and requirement that firearms in the home must be stored unloaded, taken apart or locked up. When considering the meaning of the Second Amendment for the first time in 74 years, the Court reviewed whether the Amendment protects an individual right to possess firearms, or only protects firearm possession connected to service in an armed force. From its previous interpretation of the Second Amendment, the Court held that the Amendment guarantees an individual right to possess a firearm in the home for self defense. The court denied the handgun possession ban, as well as the safe storage law. The Supreme Court stated that the Second Amendment should not be thought of as granting a right to keep and carry any weapon, in any manner, for any purpose. The court gave examples of laws that make it reasonably lawful. One example is prohibiting firearm possession by felons and the mentally ill. A second example is, ban firearm possession I sensitive places such as schools and government buildings. Lastly, is to enforce the correct conditions on the commercial sale of firearms. (ORL Research Report).

On the subject of the Second Amendment being a blessing or a curse, there is also pros and cons to every law. One of the pros that has been a discussion recently is if more gun control laws would reduce gun deaths. There were 464,033 total gun deaths between 1999 and 2013. 270,237 suicides, 174,773 homicides and 9,983 unintentional deaths. (Brady Campaign). Guns were the leading cause of death by homicide (66.6% of all homicides) and by suicide (52.2% of all suicides). Firearms were the 12th leading cause of all deaths, representing