QUES 1: SHOULD THE SECOND AMENDMENT BE CHANGED TO LIMIT

Question

QUES 1: SHOULD THE SECOND AMENDMENT BE CHANGED TO LIMIT GUN OWNERSHIP IN USA

MANZER KHAN[T] · Accepted Answer

Introduction 
The Second Amendment, one of the most contested aspects of the Constitution, is a single quote that affords a significant amount of room for opinion. Scholars disagree on whether to change the Amendment or allow Americans to own firearms.The Second Amendment gives a historical narrative to a long-drawn issue connecting individual rights and state authority1.
 The premise behind this discussion
James Madison functioned as the prime designer of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. It is a section of the Bill of Rights, which comprises the first 10 Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. These amendments were crafted and enacted in response to claims that the constitution specifically did not provide sufficient safeguards against government invasion of personal rights.
The second amendment points out that "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." Effective in 2008, the US Supreme Court made judgments in 2 cases that specifically mentioned the Second Amendment's "right to keep and bear arms" after nearly 70 years without ever doing so. These decisions have substantial social ramifications for the general populace. In District of Columbia v. Heller 1 of June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court came to the watershed conclusion that people have a personal right to keep firearms in their houses for defense under the Constitution. Through its judgment, the court overturned a District of Columbia law passed in 1976 that prohibited the possession of the majority of firearms.
 Furthermore, the Heller verdict left a number of key problems open, most prominently if the Second Amendment binds state or municipal gun legislation or simply places restrictions on the federal government. The Supreme Court ruled in McDonald v. City of Chicago on June 28, 2010 that regulations passed by state and municipal governments do, in essence, fall under the Second Amendment's authority. Meanwhile, the McDonald judgment also left relevant questions open, questions that district courts must now examine and that might have a bearing on how many Americans suffer the danger of gun violence.
 Should Americans be allowed to carry arms?
I think having access to a licensed handgun is an essential human right. It is a fundamental right to possess a weapon capable of inflicting harm on others, and it is our responsibility as a society to ensure that these firearms pass into the hands of the rightful owners.There have been many incidents throughout the past few years when those who used a gun were not legally carrying it. The concern isn't that our society permits citizens to carry firearms; rather, it's that there isn't enough surveillance around where or how those weapons are procured.
It is apparent that the second amendment's dismantling and misinterpretation has not delivered any successful effects. Gun control legislation or gun bans usually increase demand for guns, which in turn subsequently increases their price. Sales of prohibited firearms have become prevalent on black markets, keeping the majority of transactions illegitimate. Guns far more destructive than those that are outlawed as a result of these laws frequently end up in American neighborhoods. Therefore, the second amendment should be considered as a space that upholds individual liberty to protect themselves and keep our communities free from illegal gun acquisition and violence.

QUES 1: SHOULD THE SECOND AMENDMENT BE CHANGED TO LIMIT GUN OWNERSHIP IN USA

Get Instant Homework HelpOn Your Mobile

Get Instant Homework HelpOn Your Mobile