2nd Amendment - a Well Regulated Militia
Autor: simba • November 3, 2011 • Essay • 638 Words (3 Pages) • 887 Views
The Second Amendment states : "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." Do I feel that this means something else other than protecting the individual's right to keep and bear arms? No, I do not. I feel that Americans have the right to bear arms but certain people can take this right and abuse it in ways that can be dangerous.
Every American has the right to own a gun for some form of protection. I believe there is absolutely nothing wrong with this. I say this because there are numerous amounts of people in the United States who own guns illegally. Some of these people tend to have these guns for reasons that are harmful to the country. People who illegally own firearms tend to be involved with robberies and shootings. A person who is not a criminal or threat to society needs to have some sort of way to protect themselves from criminals who commit crimes that involve innocent families.
If being part of a "well regulated Militia" isn't part of the responsibility to own guns, why it the first clause? The founding fathers of this nation didn't intend Militia to stand for anything else but people owning firearms and using them responsibly without having to be in the armed forces. George Washington said, "The distinction between a well regulated Army, and a Mob, is the good order and discipline of the first, and the licentious and disorderly behavior of the latter." (GreatSeal,1). This clearly states that as long as the right is not abused, it should not be a problem.
The word "Militia" can sound frightening to some people, but I feel too many people see it in a wrong way. I believe the word needs to be seen as a group of people united by fighting for the protection of themselves and their families against people who cause harm to others. It should not be seen as an underground