For more than a century, the 2nd Amendment has been at the forefront of political upheaval. Great politicians and lawyers such as, Joseph story, speaking on the preamble of the 2nd amendment, stating that the “true office” of the preamble “is to expound the nature and extent, and application of the powers actually conferred by the constitution, and to substantively create them” § 462 (F.B. Rothman 1991) (1833). What Story meant by this was that the preamble to the constitution only states a general purpose and justifies the exercise of those powers enumerated in the document as a whole. Other more recent opinions have been offered by the likes of Justices Scalia and McReynolds, who firmly hold that the second amendment simply provides the state with the means and right to form and train its own militia. Issues
The issues surrounding this argument for more than a century is to whether the framers of the 2nd amendment intended for the people to have the” individual right to keep and bear arms” to avoid falling under rule of a tyrannical government, or did they intend those rights to be governed by the states and ultimately controlled by government. U.S. Const. Amend. II Argument
In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court held in District of Columbia v. Heller 554 U.S. __, 128 S. Ct. 2783, 171 L. Ed. 2d 637 (2008)that the Second Amendment prohibits the Federal government from passing laws prohibiting an individual's right to possess a handgun in the home and requiring any firearms in the home to be inoperable during possession. However, the Court held that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. The Federal government may enact some restrictions on firearms possession, such as: prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons, possession by felons and the mentally ill, possession in schools or government buildings, the conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms, possession of dangerous and unusual weapons (e.g., machine guns), and that...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document