"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 Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.
For the first time in 70 years, the United States Supreme court will review the right to bear arms.
The case centers on a Washington DC ban on keeping handguns at home. In 1976, a city ordinance prohibited the ownership of handguns, except for police officers (shotguns or hunting rifles are okay). This law was challenged by 6 city residents as being unconstitutional because it denied them the right to have firearms at home for self defense.
To date, the Second Amendment is the most contested issue in the interpretation of the Constitution, mirroring gun control as one of the most controversial issue in American public policy. As the debate rages on, American society continue to deal with gun violence, including sporadic yet sensational mass shootings.
Do you think that the Second Amendment is an archaic concept that shouldn’t apply in modern times? Or that it only applied to the collective "militia" and not an individual rights to begin with? Would we be safer if guns are outlawed or would it give more power to an increasingly power hungry government?
via Neatorama
