Anti Gun Advocates Laws Are Necessary For Public Safety Essay

818 Words Oct 31st, 2015 4 Pages
The U. S. Const. amend. II states, “[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.” [1] It is argued that the Constitution provides individuals the right to ownership and possession of a wide variety of weapons to use as protection. Others argue the right is not a fundamental right of the people and belongs to the states to protect and maintain organized militia units and public forces. This is under the impression that only the army and police forces have the right, not individuals. In determining the fundamental right of the people is based on the ideals of whether or not this right is driven by basic natural rights as written under the Bill of Rights to protect the people from government interference. Gun Advocate argues that the Second Amendment is a fundamental right because humans have had the right to protect themselves since ancient times. Anti-gun advocates argue that state restricting laws are necessary for public safety and the right under the Second Amendment applies only to the states and not individuals. [2] Anti-gun advocates also claim that the Fourteenth Amendment does not apply a private right of self-defense against the state and only toward that of the federal government. [3] In McDonald v. Chicago (2010) the Supreme Court held that the Bill of Rights does apply to the federal government and the states because the U. S. Cont. amend. XIV§ 1 states, “No…

Related Documents