The US Supreme Court has expanded gun laws, citing the Second Amendment to the Constitution. In fact, the interpretation of the 27 words of the Second Amendment is hotly disputed.
At a time when a wave of everyday gun violence is sweeping the United States, the US Supreme Court has expanded the right to carry guns in public. By a six-to-three judge’s vote in Washington on Thursday, a 109-year-old New York state law requires you to show good cause to obtain a license to carry a handgun concealed outside the home. The ruling violated the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, the court found.
“The constitutional right to carry guns in public for self-defense is not a second-class right,” said Judge Clarence Thomas, who has been campaigning for more gun rights for years. It cannot be subordinated to a completely different set of rules. And just as the First Amendment on free speech does not allow the prohibition of unpopular speech, the Second Amendment is not limited to individuals who can demonstrate a specific need to carry a gun in public.
But what does this Second Amendment actually say? And is his statement really that clear?
The Second Amendment, as it is called in the US, was added to the US Constitution 231 years ago. It is part of the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution, ratification of which was completed on December 15, 1791. The Second Amendment is the only one in the Bill of Rights with a preamble. It comprises a total of 27 words:
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.
The sentence sounds awkward, the comma confused and one has to consider that it is written in the language of the 18th century. The US Embassy in Germany translates it as follows:
Since a well-trained militia is necessary for the security of a free state, the people’s right to own and bear arms must not be infringed upon.
The problem is that the text states the need for a militia on the one hand and the people’s right to arms on the other, but does not clearly clarify the connection between these two statements. Does the Second Amendment protect the right to an armed militia such as the National Guard? Or does it protect the right of every individual to own a gun?
Gun laws for militias or individuals?
The debates about the Second Amendment focus on these very questions. But that was not always so. For most of American history, it was crystal clear that the amendment was intended to protect the right of “free states” to maintain “well-regulated militias,” according to the Washington Post. When the constitution was ratified, critics feared the resulting document could create an all-powerful federal state with a standing army and wipe out state militias, threatening state sovereignty. The Second Amendment was intended to prevent this.
Walter Grünzweig, Professor of American Literature and Culture at the Technical University of Dortmund, sees it this way: “The Second Amendment came about during the War of Independence against the English, when the Americans were fighting the English with militias”.
In 1939, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld this militia-based understanding of the article. Three years later, a federal appeals court found that it was “clearly evident” that the Second Amendment “was adopted not with regard to the rights of individuals, but as a safeguard for states in maintaining their militia organizations against possible encroachments of federal power”.
NRA and Ronald Reagan advocate individual gun rights
And so, until recently, the Second Amendment was dead law—a law about which there was little legal debate. However, after riots, protests and rising crime in the 1960s drove more citizens to protect themselves with guns and the National Rifle Organization (NRA) began to focus more on politics in the 1970s, rather than shooting sports and recreational activities, then-Republican presidential candidate Ronald Reagan jumped on the bandwagon in 1976 and advocated that the Second Amendment “should be construed” to protect the “individual citizen.” Four years later, Reagan became the first presidential candidate endorsed by the NRA — and won the election.
Finally, in 2008, the Supreme Court intervened in the debate. By a majority of 5 votes to 4, the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller found Washington DC’s restrictive gun laws unconstitutional. The wording and history of the Second Amendment shows that it protects a private right of individuals to possess arms for their own defense, rather than a right of states to maintain militia, the court ruled.
In the course of time, the Second Amendment was increasingly reinterpreted as the right of every individual to bear arms, Walter Grünzweig also noted. “And unfortunately there are a number of Supreme Court decisions that confirm this.” And since Thursday there is one more.
There are nearly 400 million firearms in the United States — more than there are people. Pistols and rifles are extremely easy to buy, deadly gun incidents sad everyday. According to the CDC, about 20,000 people were shot dead in the United States in 2020 — more than 50 a day.
Sources: , , , , , ,
Source: Stern
David William is a talented author who has made a name for himself in the world of writing. He is a professional author who writes on a wide range of topics, from general interest to opinion news. David is currently working as a writer at 24 hours worlds where he brings his unique perspective and in-depth research to his articles, making them both informative and engaging.
