The history of the Second Amendment is long and twisted the Amendment itself has been subject to repeated scrutiny and elaboration, and the way in which it’s interpreted today is a relatively new way of understanding this statute written in the late 18th century.
And, surprisingly, both sides rest their arguments on an oft-quoted amendment of the US Bill of Rights - specifically, the Second Amendment. One side claims that this right is universal and unbreakable, while the other routinely argues that this claim is a misunderstanding of the U.S Constitution. The reason? The United States is divided in its belief over the rights of individual citizens to own guns. While the international community has trouble understanding this, citizens of America realize that - for many politicians - the words “gun control” can actually result in political suicide. Yet - although senators and representatives routinely offer “thoughts and prayers” for the victims - nothing of substance has been done to make large public settings any safer from the potential terror firearms can cause. One would think that enacting legislation to prevent such atrocities would be an enormously smart career move for any smart politician. However, over the last two decades, a number of individuals have done exactly that the settings of each incident now existing infused with terror (consider the impact of the words Columbine High School, Pulse Nightclub, Orlando Florida, or Sandy Hook Elementary School). As a citizen of the United States, do I have the right to massacre a large group of my fellow citizens?
0 kommentar(er)
