UTD Guns the Second Amendment Room for Varied Interpretation Discussion

Awell-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.

That is the full text of the 2^nd amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Ifanyone tells you they KNOW! definitively what it means, they are givingyou their opinion rather than an objective fact. They can’t possiblyknow, because it’s inherently ambiguous, as much as some people wouldlike to believe otherwise.

Somepeople say it means that the government has no constitutional authorityto limit a citizen’s right to own semi-automatic handguns or an AR-15,or even a Barrett M82 .50 caliber rifle. Some say it means that anyonein an official militia, like the National Guard, has the right to beararms. Some say the “militia” really means everyone, because when theconstitution was drafted, everyone was subject to being activated torepel invaders. Many historians think evidence points to the conclusionthat the 2^nd Amendment was ratified *not* to guarantee anindividual right to be continually armed, but because there waswidespread opposition to a standing army, so state militias werenecessary and should not be disarmed.

Other people may have other interpretations of the 2^nd amendment. So when your great uncle Norman (I hope no one actually has a great uncle Norman!) tells you the 2^nd amendment gives him a constitutionally guaranteed right to have that AR-15, the truth is…. maybe, maybe not.

In United States v. Miller (1939)the supreme court held at least that the 2nd Amendment allows thegovernment to reasonably regulate ownership of firearms. Some interpretit to go further, and rule that the 2nd Amendment only protectsownership of weapons in the context of a “well-regulated militia.”Others dispute that, but the court did not find in favor of anindividualized right to bear arms for 70 years.

The Supreme Court held in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) (Wikipedia) or here(case page at SCOTUSBlog) that the Constitution protects an individualright to own a handgun in the home for self-protection — not only formembers of militias. But also not more broadly than, as I said, to own ahandgun in the home for self-protection.

More recently, the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals held in an opinion (Peruta v. California) issued on June 9, 2016, that the Second Amendment does notensure an individual right to bear arms in public. At that link you candownload the opinion and also listen to, or even watch video of, theoral argument that led to it. This Ninth Circuit opinion bears onweapons outside the home. Here’sone of many news stories about it. According to the decision,individuals are not barred from carrying weapons, but states or otherpolitical subdivisions do not violate constitutional rights by requiringindividuals to demonstrate a strong need to have a firearm beforeissuing a license.

Thatdecision was appealed, and the Supreme Court did not agree to hear theappeal, so the Ninth Circuit Court ruling becomes final, in the NinthCircuit. Here’s the SCOTUSBlog case page about Peruta.

Then in February 2017, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling that Maryland’s law banning AR-15s, high-capacity magazines and other “weapons of war” was constitutional. Here is a National Review article criticizing the decision and here is an article from The Trace supporting it. If you’re interested, here is another article from The Trace discussing the question of whether an AR-15 should be considered a weapon of war.

What do you think? Should there be stricter limits on gun ownership and carrying?

Requirement: at least 250 words

And remember as you are considering this question that according to the Gun Violence Archive, there were 346 mass shootings in the US in 2017, and there have been 247 in 2018 as of 9/8/2018. That includes 113 children ages 0-11 killed or injured.

Rememberthat our discussion boards are not typical online forums where insults,name-calling and snide dismissiveness are acceptable. We are in ascholarly academic environment, and you are required to reflect thatattitude in discussion board posts, as with everything you do in this orany class.

Andremember that I ask questions attempting to create discussions. Do notassume you know my personal position, and do not consider whether youwill agree with me, or not, in your posts.