The Second Amendment-
The second amendment has been at times the cornerstone of political controversies or arguments throughout the decades due to what many would construe as an open ended interpretation by the founding fathers on the right of an American to own a firearm. The first and in many cases major line of ‘defense’ (no pun intended) for gun advocates, stating the original ideology of the founding fathers and those who founded this nation was a nation based on the freedom to bear arms for ones self interests. The amendment 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” , and many feel as though the key words are ‘shall not be …show more content…
In contrast, those who have anti-gun sentiment have also used the second amendment as a tool for their argumentative position. When conceived, the writers on the constitution have just separated from an oppressive regime, feeling void of rights and liberties, they constructed their own. And though the first ten amendments have withstood a history long past the lifespan of their original founders, many would argue this foresight was for a future, but assumingly not a far future where firearms, and the vast amount of people who will populate the United States would be present. During the revolution, firearms were far less sophisticated then they are currently, as well as expensive in relation to the era. While owning two or three guns might satisfy an individual in terms of safety, they would also be regarded as a higher-class individual, not as common in colonist communities who were the more prevalent class in terms of population at the time. Even in modern times, you rarely find state run militias, instead there is national armed force comprised of 5 main branches to protect the entire nation, domestically and internationally along with other armed forced tasked with protecting the nations citizens i.e State National Guards, local police
The second amendment has been at times the cornerstone of political controversies or arguments throughout the decades due to what many would construe as an open ended interpretation by the founding fathers on the right of an American to own a firearm. The first and in many cases major line of ‘defense’ (no pun intended) for gun advocates, stating the original ideology of the founding fathers and those who founded this nation was a nation based on the freedom to bear arms for ones self interests. The amendment 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” , and many feel as though the key words are ‘shall not be …show more content…
In contrast, those who have anti-gun sentiment have also used the second amendment as a tool for their argumentative position. When conceived, the writers on the constitution have just separated from an oppressive regime, feeling void of rights and liberties, they constructed their own. And though the first ten amendments have withstood a history long past the lifespan of their original founders, many would argue this foresight was for a future, but assumingly not a far future where firearms, and the vast amount of people who will populate the United States would be present. During the revolution, firearms were far less sophisticated then they are currently, as well as expensive in relation to the era. While owning two or three guns might satisfy an individual in terms of safety, they would also be regarded as a higher-class individual, not as common in colonist communities who were the more prevalent class in terms of population at the time. Even in modern times, you rarely find state run militias, instead there is national armed force comprised of 5 main branches to protect the entire nation, domestically and internationally along with other armed forced tasked with protecting the nations citizens i.e State National Guards, local police