Is There a Constitutional Right to Possess a Firearm for Private Use Research Paper

Is There a Constitutional Right to Possess a Firearm for Private Use - Research Paper ExampleBody The trice Amendment provides a general rule for the proper to bear accouterments, and under such provision, the right to possess firearms for private use seems to be clear-cut and undeniable. The Supreme court of law has provided various sentiments for the application of this right. In the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller case, the SC held that the Second Amendment indeed cling tos the right of the people as private citizens to bear arms. This ruling basically declared that individuals were legally protected in their right to keep a loaded gun in their home for their self-defense (Vicini, 2008). This ruling save did not settle any misgivings on the part of individuals who did not favor the legalization, as well as the widespread use and bearing of arms. To this date therefore, this ruling is still controversial and for various individuals with legal considerations on the case they would not likely hesitate in seeking other interpretations of this right by the courts. The right to bear arms has long since been considered a universal right, especially during the earliest years of the worlds history when wars were rampant and disputes were often settled by means of violent skirmishes (Hollister, 1962). The precursors of guns included bows and arrows, spears, and other harmful and deadly weapons, like swords and daggers. The right to possess and bear arms was firmly supported, retained, and expanded. All serfs, tenants, and subjects of the state and of the crown were necessitate to bear arms in order to protect the state (Lyon, 1980). Various evolutions of armaments and weapons were seen throughout the years, and the people were also required to bear arms when they would travel, attend fairs, or when they would go to markets (Lyon, 1980). The people were even asked to train in the use of long-bows and other arms in order to ensure their protection. In the 1500s in England, the crown mulish to ban firearms (meaning, bows and arrows) instead a militia was to be trained in the use of these arms (Bagley and Rowley, 1965). This militia would be considered the armed citizenry of the English policy-making system. This move however backfired when the militia turned on the crown and gained temporary chasteness of the government (Bagley and Rowley, 1965). This prompted the Parliament to order the search and destruction of all arms from all opponents of the crown. As the crown was later restored, the military governments reign ended. In general, all arms by the militia were banned and confiscated (Malcolm, 1980). This control of the militia was carried over to the control of Britain over its American colonies. After persistent moves by the British government to control its American colonials, including their rights to bear arms, the need to protect the right to bear arms became an even bigger necessity (Patterson, 1973).