Second Amendment (Advanced Level)

In this session, students will engage in a conversation on the #SecondAmendment, and its protection of the right to keep and bear arms. This exchange introduces students to different viewpoints and debates surrounding the Second Amendment by using the National Constitution Center’s Interactive Constitution. Students will analyze the Second Amendment’s text and history, how the Second Amendment shaped its core protections, and how the #SupremeCourt has interpreted it over time. Through these discussions, students will build understanding of the resources and methods used by Supreme Court justices and constitutional scholars when analyzing and forming opinions this provision. Students will identify key points of agreement and disagreement from essays by #constitutional scholars, be able to trace the historic development of the Second Amendment, and use evidence from the readings to explore modern interpretation of the Second Amendment.

Follow the National Constitution Center on social media!

[raymarchetta]

Held:
1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm UNCONNECTED with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. - Heller, 2008.

[Dragontron]

It in fact protects all arms. Swords, guns, bats, everything.

[BenTheThird]

‘Arms’ includes armor for defense… such as ceramic plate body armor.

[joykeebler]

Arms - being 'capitalized' - "exclusively": All the kinds of Weaponry: that would be necessary - for the 'domestic' and 'national' defense.

[s.evanhowie]

In 1933 the National Guard was federalized as a reserve component of the US Army. It is essentially the army at the state level, but can be deployed outside of the country in times of war. The militia is a separate entity…

[afnDavid]

To me this is beginner to intermediate level mainly because they only present a superficial and incomplete explanation of what the 2nd is, how it came about, or what inspired our founding fathers. I had much higher expectations, when I saw "Advanced Level." Quite disappointed.

[Roger-wsrj]

I really love how when people bring up weapons that are in common use as for reasons to be acceptable into the public, they fail to realize that a bazooka (for example) is in common use in the military, the military which is what we need to defend ourselves against in case of a hostile government which is why we need the second amendment and why it protects all arms.

[andybreglia]

When the sheriff calls up a posse, he is effectively activating elements of the constitutional militia.

[jamesherron]

The whole Bill of Rights was written after the constitution constitution deals with the government powers, and how it will operate. The bill of rights are additional limits on the power and non-negotiable rights of the people.

[Anglsaxnknight]

Common use and dangerous and unusual weapons isn’t found anywhere in the Constitution. So how can that be used as a deciding factor? Considering that anyone could design and build any weapon they wanted to. Also Cannons and war ships were in private hands. In my opinion is if the government can use it then the PEOPLE can also.

[dragonf]

US supreme Court
"The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since it's unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment... In legal contemplation it is as inoperative as if it had never been passed... Since an unconstitutional law is void the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no right, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection and justifies no acts performed under it. A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supercede any existing law. Indeed insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land (the constitution)it is superceded thereby. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it."
Bonnet V. Vallier, 16 NW. 885, 136 Wis. 193(1908) Norton V. Shelby county, 118 US 425(1886).

Heller and anything on should all be moot, null and void.
This case precedes heller and everything after heller, the NFA, GCA and all illegal unconstitutional gun control laws should all be null and void not legally binding enforceable laws.

[jamesherron]

Yeah, the problem with the National Guard and early 1900s was the founding fathers only intended for Americans to defend our country not go around the world attacking a foreign countries but again the main reason for the first paragraph of the second amendment was to ensure the sovereignty of the state from the federal government

[prepperdan]

Maybe the 2nd amendment is not needed "today" but who knows in 20 or 50 or 100 years due to incrementalism of laws and society maybe our children will need these powers. There may be a time when the government turns on the people in such a way that an uprising may be necessary. These rights must be protected

[commonsenseskeptic]

By the five minute mark, this video fall flat on its face. Your "expert" completely misses the mark.

[anthonyshaddox]

The flaw in the legal arguments for the interpretation of the second amendment by the academic community. Case in point: English Common Law. The founding fathers and the colonists were English citizens beholding to English Common Law. In the Declaration of Independance all points listed showed where the English King was violating The Law. For example: it had been unlawful for the English king to barracks troops on private property since the 12th century. Example two: After the battle of Hastings in the war with William the Conqueror, some of William's descendance became so corrupt English Citizens were being killed because of their corruption. The people forced up on the king The Right of Lawful Rebellion. Where in if the government became so corrupt it was causing citizens the loss of their lives, the people had the right to take up arms and remove the corrupt government from power restoring Law and Order (Yes, this means bloodshed.) This is what the founders of our country did in the hostilities that created our nation. Armed private citizens removing corrupt government from power. The argument of gun control advocates breaks this right. It is interesting how Academia presents its information as if none of these issues ever occurred before in the entirety of history and only became a problem that America had to address.

[jimjersey]

When will the scotus rule on nonviolent felons 2A rights ??? Like the Range case or Williams case ?

[andybreglia]

"Well regulated" in the context of 1790 era means well trained and skilled. Today, this is one of the functions of the municipal rifle range and local rifle instructors. We are talking shooting skills and not dismounted drill and other trappings of a standing Army.

[dragonf]

The second amendment Text explicitly states THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE, therefore protects every single American citizen whether they are a felon or not or a law abiding citizen or not.

[chriscarey]

I may be wrong as Im not an English scholar but I read this to be two independent sentences joined together first you have to”a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state shall not be infringed” the second I read “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed”. I would love to hear the thoughts of an English major on this interpretation.

[dragonf]

We the people are the state not law enforcement, judges, politicians. In order for we the people to remain free from tyranny, crime, foriegn invasion we the people each and every individual american citizen must be well armed with weapons that are in good working order.