Second Amendment - Revision history

Aschlafly: copy-edit improvements

2024-06-14T16:38:55Z

copy-edit improvements

Show changes

Progressingamerica: /* Individual or Collective Right? */

2024-03-13T00:31:39Z

Individual or Collective Right?

Progressingamerica: Warren Burger in Parade Magazine, 1990

2024-03-13T00:24:14Z

Warren Burger in Parade Magazine, 1990

Progressingamerica: Militia clause, quoting T. M. Cooley

2023-09-22T00:34:13Z

Militia clause, quoting T. M. Cooley

Conservative at 17:32, August 14, 2023

2023-08-14T17:32:16Z

Aschlafly: /* Individual or Collective Right? */ Many pithy quotes by Founding Fathers support the Second Amendment right of individuals.

2023-02-26T21:46:16Z

Individual or Collective Right?: Many pithy quotes by Founding Fathers support the Second Amendment right of individuals.

Progressingamerica: Britannica refers to the 1689 Bill of Rights as the "predecessor".

2021-12-18T01:10:38Z

Britannica refers to the 1689 Bill of Rights as the "predecessor".

Aschlafly at 02:42, July 6, 2021

2021-07-06T02:42:43Z

RobSmith: Reverted edits by JesusIsSaviour (talk) to last revision by Aschlafly

2021-06-24T23:17:40Z

Reverted edits by JesusIsSaviour (talk) to last revision by Aschlafly

JesusIsSaviour at 23:14, June 24, 2021

2021-06-24T23:14:46Z

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 == Individual or Collective Right? ==
-One of the first people to advance the notion that the Second Amendment was never for individuals but was instead a "collective right", was [[Warren Burger]], who in 1990 wrote an article in Parade Magazine arguing a limited context based on the needs of only a state, not individuals.<ref>[https://guncite.com/burger.html The Right To Bear Arms], By Warren E. Burger, Chief Justice of the United States (1969-86), Parade Magazine, January 14, 1990, page 4</ref><ref>[https://buckscountyherald.com/stories/no-confusion-in-meaning-of-the-second-amendment,10169 No confusion in meaning of the Second Amendment]</ref>  Burger's rationale was never a part of official Supreme Court opinions nor was it a part of a long and well-researched historical work with deep citations and long quotes.  Rather, the entire article is roughly 900 words and happily takes several facts out of context.<ref>[https://davekopel.org/2A/Mags/crburger.htm]</ref>
+One of the first people to advance the notion that the Second Amendment was never for individuals but was instead a "collective right", was [[Warren Burger]], who in 1990 wrote an article in Parade Magazine arguing a limited context based on the needs of only a state, not individuals.<ref>[https://guncite.com/burger.html The Right To Bear Arms], By Warren E. Burger, Chief Justice of the United States (1969-86), Parade Magazine, January 14, 1990, page 4</ref><ref>[https://buckscountyherald.com/stories/no-confusion-in-meaning-of-the-second-amendment,10169 No confusion in meaning of the Second Amendment]</ref>  Burger's rationale was never a part of official Supreme Court opinions nor was it a part of a long and well-researched historical work with deep citations and long quotes.  Rather, the entire article is roughly 900 words and happily takes several facts out of context.<ref>[https://davekopel.org/2A/Mags/crburger.htm Warren Burger and the Second Amendment]</ref>
 Afterwards, lower federal courts became much more comfortable interpreting the Second Amendment as protecting merely a collective right of state militias now that they had the weight of a former Chief Justice lending power to such claims.<ref>http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/35finalpartone.htm</ref> However, the [[U.S Supreme Court]] has always called it an individual right. The 2008 Supreme Court decision of ''[[District of Columbia v. Heller]]'' ruled 5–4 that the Second Amendment protects an individual right. This decision was expanded upon in ''[[McDonald v. Chicago]]'' two years later, which ruled that Second Amendment applies to protect individual rights against state and city laws also.

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 == Individual or Collective Right? ==
-For several decades, the lower federal courts had interpreted the Second Amendment as protecting merely a collective right of state militias.<ref>http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/35finalpartone.htm</ref> However, the [[U.S Supreme Court]] has always called it an individual right. The 2008 Supreme Court decision of ''[[District of Columbia v. Heller]]'' ruled 5–4 that the Second Amendment protects an individual right. This decision was expanded upon in ''[[McDonald v. Chicago]]'' two years later, which ruled that Second Amendment applies to protect individual rights against state and city laws also.
+One of the first people to advance the notion that the Second Amendment was never for individuals but was instead a "collective right", was [[Warren Burger]], who in 1990 wrote an article in Parade Magazine arguing a limited context based on the needs of only a state, not individuals.<ref>[https://guncite.com/burger.html The Right To Bear Arms], By Warren E. Burger, Chief Justice of the United States (1969-86), Parade Magazine, January 14, 1990, page 4</ref><ref>[https://buckscountyherald.com/stories/no-confusion-in-meaning-of-the-second-amendment,10169 No confusion in meaning of the Second Amendment]</ref>  Burger's rationale was never a part of official Supreme Court opinions nor was it a part of a long and well-researched historical work with deep citations and long quotes.  Rather, the entire article is roughly 900 words and happily takes several facts out of context.<ref>[https://davekopel.org/2A/Mags/crburger.htm]</ref>
 Many pithy quotes by [[Founding Fathers]] support the Second Amendment right of individuals.<ref>https://www.concealedcarry.com/gun-quotes-from-our-founding-fathers-2nd-amendment/</ref>

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:34, September 22, 2023
Line 76:		Line 76:

	As of 2007, people argue about the meaning of the Second Amendment, but there is no definitive answer. The latest ruling is ''Parker v District of Columbia'', in which the DC Circuit court of appeals ruled on March 9, 2007, that the [[Washington, D.C.\|DC]] gun ban violated individual rights under the Second Amendment.		As of 2007, people argue about the meaning of the Second Amendment, but there is no definitive answer. The latest ruling is ''Parker v District of Columbia'', in which the DC Circuit court of appeals ruled on March 9, 2007, that the [[Washington, D.C.\|DC]] gun ban violated individual rights under the Second Amendment.
		+
		+	==Militia clause==
		+	The Second Amendment begins with the phrase "''A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state''". This phrase has created quite a lot of contention with those who believe this is a triumph for the regulatory state, or that it means only military members can own guns. As many of the Founding Fathers have explained, the militia is the whole people. Thomas M. Cooley's ''Principles of Constitutional Law'' explains that this right is an individual right for the whole people and why that is a benefit for themselves and for government:
		+
		+	<blockquote>The Right is General. - It might be supposed from the phraseology of this provision that the right to keep and bear arms was only guaranteed to the militia; but this would be an interpretation not warranted by the intent. The militia, as has been explained elsewhere, consists of those persons who, under the law, are liable to the performance of military duty, and are officered and enrolled for service when called upon. But the law may make provision for the enrolment of all who are fit to perform military duty, or of a small number only, or it may wholly omit to make any provision at all; and ''if the right were limited to those enrolled, the purpose of the guarantee might be defeated altogether by the action or the neglect to act of the government it was meant to hold in check''. The meaning of the provision undoubtedly is, that the people, from whom the militia must be taken, shall have the right to keep and bear arms; and they need no permission or regulation of law for the purpose. But this enables the government to have a well regulated militia; for to bear arms implies something more than mere keeping; it implies the learning to handle and use them in a way that makes those who keep them ready for their efficient use; in other words, it implies the right to meet for voluntary discipline in arms, observing in so doing the laws of public order.<ref>[https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_General_Principles_of_Constitutional/SkFMAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA271 The General Principles of Constitutional Law in the United States of America], Thomas M. Cooley, 1880</ref></blockquote>

	==The One Comma vs. The Three Comma Debate==		==The One Comma vs. The Three Comma Debate==

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 <center>''See also the failed [[liberal]] approach of [[gun control]]''.</center>
 The '''Second Amendment''' to the [[United States Constitution]] states:<ref>This is the most-often quoted form of this Amendment, but note later in this entry the significant objection to including three commas rather than just one.</ref>
 {{cquote|'''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.'''}}

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 == Individual or Collective Right? ==
 For several decades, the lower federal courts had interpreted the Second Amendment as protecting merely a collective right of state militias.<ref>http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/35finalpartone.htm</ref> However, the [[U.S Supreme Court]] has always called it an individual right. The 2008 Supreme Court decision of ''[[District of Columbia v. Heller]]'' ruled 5–4 that the Second Amendment protects an individual right. This decision was expanded upon in ''[[McDonald v. Chicago]]'' two years later, which ruled that Second Amendment applies to protect individual rights against state and city laws also.
 ==Where the Second Amendment comes from==

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 As [[U.S. Supreme Court]] Justice [[Joseph Story]] explained:
 {{cquote|The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a [[republic]]; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.}}
 == Individual or Collective Right? ==
 For several decades, the lower federal courts had interpreted the Second Amendment as protecting merely a collective right of state militias.<ref>http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/35finalpartone.htm</ref> However, the [[U.S Supreme Court]] has always called it an individual right. The 2008 Supreme Court decision of ''[[District of Columbia v. Heller]]'' ruled 5–4 that the Second Amendment protects an individual right. This decision was expanded upon in ''[[McDonald v. Chicago]]'' two years later, which ruled that Second Amendment applies to protect individual rights against state and city laws also.

@@ Line 51: / Line 51: @@
 Early justices of the [[Supreme Court of the United States]], such as the preeminent Justice [[Joseph Story]], considered the Second Amendment to be a fundamental right for overall liberty.
 == Supreme Court Decisions ==
@@ Line 58: / Line 62: @@
 *''[[McDonald v. Chicago]]'' (2010) (merely extended the ''Heller'' decision to apply against State and local laws, too).
-==Comments==
+==Individual right==
 The [[National Rifle Association]], which supports gun rights, has a stone plaque in front of its headquarters bearing the words "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." By dropping the "militia" phrase, the slogan advocates that the Second Amendment should mean that individual citizens have the right to own and use guns.
@@ Line 70: / Line 71: @@
 As of 2007, people argue about the meaning of the Second Amendment, but there is no definitive answer. The latest ruling is ''Parker v District of Columbia'', in which the DC Circuit court of appeals ruled on March 9, 2007, that the [[Washington, D.C.|DC]] gun ban violated individual rights under the Second Amendment.
-===The One Comma vs. The Three Comma Debate===
+==The One Comma vs. The Three Comma Debate==
 '''''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.'''''
@@ Line 83: / Line 84: @@
 Before beginning, one must note that common nouns, like "state" and "people," were often capitalized in official and unofficial documents of the era. Also, an obsolete formation of the letter "s" used to indicate the long "s" sound was in common usage. The long 's' is subject to confusion with the lower case  'f', therefore, Congress" is sometimes spelled as "Congrefs," as is the case in the parchment copy of the Bill of Rights displayed by the National Archives. The quotations listed here are accurate. With the exception of the omission of quotations marks, versions of what is now known as the Second Amendment in boldface appear with the exact spelling, capitalization, and punctuation as the cited originals.
-===Chronological History===
+==Chronological History==
 During ratification debates on the Constitution in the state conventions, several states proposed amendments to that charter. Anti-Federalist opposition to ratification was particularly strong in the key states of New York and Virginia, and one of their main grievances was that the Constitution lacked a declaration of rights. During the ratification process, Federalist James Madison became a champion of such a declaration, and so it fell to him, as a member of the 1st Congress, to write one. On June 8, 1789, Madison introduced his declaration of rights on the floor of the House. One of its articles read:

@@ Line 196: / Line 196: @@
 [[Category:Second Amendment]]
-{{Communism}}
 {{Firearms topics}}