Do US citizens have right to own guns?

drq_driver

In every dictatorship the government did one thing first before it seized total absolute power over it's people, it took away their right to protect themselves, that way when the solders of the newly formed dictatorship came marching through the cities to collect what the government wanted from its people, be it property, daughters, money or land, the fear of being shot at was much less, so when our founding fathers in the U.S. sat down to write out what rights the people had they agreed that the two most important things were Freedom to speak their minds and the freedom to protect themselves and their property. thus our first amendment to the constitution is Free speech and the second is the right to keep and bare arms. It is a way of ensuring that the government doesn't run ramrod over the people.

Matt

Not according to liberal Democrats.

QueryJ

Amendment II (the Second Amendment) of the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, declares the necessity for "a well regulated militia", and prohibits infringement of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms."

The right of the people to bear arms is necessary to defense of the home, the community and the country. If citizens can not arm themselves, then the power shifts in the world and in government would endanger us all. This was the thinking of our forefathers in drafting the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

blue.orchid2

Absolutely! The first thing Hitler did was collect the guns. Need I say more?

JUAN FRAN$$$

Second Amendment to the Constitution in the Bill of Rights.

The title to the Amendments gives the militia the right to bear arms. Then in the Amendment itself it defines who the Militia is.
The Militia is every able-bodied Male eighteen years of age and older.
The reasoning behind it was actually two fold. First was where the government would have an army of citizen soldiers at the ready in case of war.
The second reasoning was in the citizens being able to protect themselves from the government itself and to prevent the government leaders or military from seizing power and setting up a dictatorship or monarchy. Namely to insure the government did not try to take the citizen's rights from them by force.

And in that context it was also a way for the citizen to defend himself against criminals/ And if you have been keeping up with the news any at all that is the last thing the Brotherhood of crooks & Cops Union wants. It is also the last thing Lawyers want. Lawyers make their living defending crooks. And without crooks Cops are out of a job.

johnny cee

The Second Amendment. Although many would like to destroy it.
I Cr 13;8a

bad girl

originally, back in the day of the writings of the constitution, it was a safety thing about making sure the the government would not get too controlling of it's people. It's in one of our amendments (I'll get back to you, my dad is a veteran member of the NRA so I was started young lol)

freshbliss

2 amendment - we have the right as a people to defend ourselves - to form a militia.
The reasons for this are simple. When the Declaration of Independence was written we were kind of telling Britain to get lost.

Jaff

The second Ammendment permits americans to own guns for self protection, not many abuse it but a few do, and I think americans need to be complimented for this, as may possess guns and other fire arms which they obediently clean and proudly possess without having to use it, and that gives them a good nights sleep as they feel safe.

scruffycat

Nowadays, they have a privilege to own guns.

DixeVil

Read the US Constitution.

Slider728

This is a very unique and touchy subject.

The 2nd Amendment does say that the right to "keep and bear arms will not be infringed". It also mentions a well-organized militia.

The US Code, TITLE 10, Subtitle A, PART I, CHAPTER 13 deals with the definition of a miltia. The US CODE defines miltia as:

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia areâ€”
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

The whole "well-regulated" clause makes a strong arguement for an individual, non-military citizen not having the right to own a firearm.

However, if you look at a few court cases, the opposite seems true:

In US vs Miller (US Supreme Court, 1939), the opinion states that when the Bill of Rights were written, the following applied to a militia:

"These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time. "

So a militia is expected to supply its own arms. However, Miller also tells us in the end that certain weapons are not protected as also stated in the opinion: "'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. "

Then if you fast forward a number of years to US vs. Emerson (5th District Court, 1999), the opinion states: "The structure of the Second Amendment within the Bill of Rights proves that the right to bear arms is an individual right, rather than a collective one. " While previous court cases showed the 2nd Amendment as a collective right rather than an individual right, Emerson explicitly states that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right. To the best of my knowledge, the Emerson has not yet been overturned. The US vs. Emerson case is an excellent opinion to read for both gun control and gun owners alike!

Do Americans have the right to own guns? Only time will tell. The only Supreme Court case (Miller) that has dealt with the issue dealt with the constitutionality of a sawed off shotgun, not the persons right to bear arms.

Why would a country give people the right to have firearms? It protects the people from government, both foreign and domestic. No government wants to take on an armed population of a country because they will lose. A person fighting for their home is much more powerful than a hired soldier. An armies greatest technologies can be rendered worthless if their supplies are cut off. How useful are tanks and planes without fuel? How good are soldiers without food? The citizens of the country control the vital resources. Even if the government or military takes over such vital resources, they will need manpower to harvest the resources, manpower that is valuable in a civil war or if invading a land far from home.

mike b

yes we do it is in our Constitution in most states you can get a permit to carry a concealed gun i have one i carry a Colt 45 1911 just in case somebody tried to kill me i can defend myself and i most states you can get a permit to have a automatic gun like a machine gun i got that to its a Sten MK2 sub machine gun i have that mainly for target practice and in case somebody breaks in my house i can defend myself

jmwildenthal

Bill of Rights, part of our Constitution, in the Second Amendment.

I'll assume you can parse the sentence. There is one grammatical clause. In a sentence, the clause is the most important part. Words that are not part of any clause are effectively lower in importance. So what is that clause?

Subject:
(The) right

Whose right?
of the people

Which right?
to keep and bear arms

What about that right?
shall not be infringed.

The prefatory phrase explains why this right exists. Free states have properly functioning (the period definition of "well-regulated") militias. It is easier to have a properly functioning militia if all the potential members know how to use arms.

psykokestrel

2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights guarentees a person the right to bare arms. Without this right our government would then rid us of all the other rights, this would include right to religion, speech or maybe the use of computers. Nazi's found it a quick solution to get rid of gun ownership then get rid of those people that could not fight back because they hated the Nazi party political stance. In modern America, the lose of legal ownership would not rid the streets of guns, it would rid the streets of law abiding citizens. Look at the multitude of countries who banned guns in recent history and you see explosions in crime rates.

AaronKristopher

Yes, all states allow some form of gun ownership. Some states have few gun laws like VT others have lots like CA. The reasoning is that people want to be able to protect themselfs. It isn't nessisarly important in fact it is dangerous. It is written is state constitutions. And there are both federal and state laws and regualations on it. what is what for? I think the only reason people should own guns is to protect them from the gov.

cantcu

Yes, it is in the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution and has survived US Supreme court challenges! Some weapons are banned, like machine guns and automatic rifles.

It was basically to have a last resort if we were attacked and ran out of military! In my state, our Constitution says this:

"June 2, 1784

[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind."

This should be in the US Constitution as well! Heaven knows we need it as ours is so corrupt, perverted and represents a private class: the rich!

the_buccaru

The 2nd amendment was never intended to allow private citizens to 'keep and bear arms.' If it had, there would have been explicit wording such as "...the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." .. OK being facetious... It is stating that the "right" pre existed the Constitution and that the government can not infringe on the pre existing right of self defense that has existed from the beginning of mankind.

skytzo !

ameriacan can own guns if they have never been convicted of felonies matter of fact in some states they can even carry concealed guns on them like kansas for instance we just passed a law allowingthat its so stupid rednecks can feel powerful and so poor people will kill each other or so rich people can kill poor peolpe population control you know its a nessessary evil

bestguessing

Yes they do. The Second Amendment to the US Constituion gives citizens the right to bear arms. The reason given is "for the maintenance of a militia." In 1787, the government couldn't afford to buy enough guns to outfit the army, so they thought the best way around this was to let private citizens own them. Because we have a professional army now, it is less vital that citizens own guns, but it is a Constitutional guarantee that has never been fully done away with.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: