Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Historically, the right to keep and bear arms, whether considered an individual or a collective or a militia right, did not originate fully formed in the Bill of Rights in 1791; rather, the Second Amendment was the codification of the six-centuries-old responsibility to keep and bear arms for king and country that was inherited from the English ...
But if "bear arms" means, as the petitioners and the dissent think, the carrying of arms only for military purposes, one simply cannot add "for the purpose of killing game". The right "to carry arms in the militia for the purpose of killing game" is worthy of the mad hatter. The dissenting justices were not persuaded by this argument. [269]
The Bill of Rights 1689 allowed Protestant citizens of England to "have Arms for their Defense suitable to their Conditions and as allowed by Law." This restricted the ability of the English Crown to have a standing army or to interfere with Protestants' right to bear arms "when Papists were both Armed and Imployed contrary to Law" and established that Parliament, not the Crown, could regulate ...
If the arms were only intended for a militia, why didn't our founders, the ones who wrote the amendment, make an attempt to "ban weapons" in 1792, 1800, 1820, during their lifetime?
It was only a year ago that the Supreme Court issued a landmark Second Amendment opinion that expanded gun rights nationwide and established that firearms rules must be consistent with the nation ...
Supporters believe that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does not allow for any restrictions on gun rights, including the right to carry or bear arms. They believe that criminals ...
The phrase "constitutional carry" reflects the idea that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not allow restrictions on gun rights, including the right to carry or bear arms. [7] [8] The U.S. Supreme Court had never extensively interpreted the Second Amendment until the landmark case District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008. [9]
The court reasoned that the right as defined has no limits and "in fact consists of nothing else but the liberty." Any restriction on the right, including the prohibition of concealed carry was a violation of the right. [9] In contrast the court in Reid upheld a similar ban on concealed carry. The Alabama constitution read, "that every citizen ...