Indian federation is not the result of an agreement between States. There is only one citizenship for both the States and Union. Each State sends M. There is no principle of quality between the states.
Arms and the Antebellum Experience a. Arms and the Southern Order p. A History Ignored Conclusion: Self-Defense and the Gun Control Question Today It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognized as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, It is a constitutional debate that has taken place largely in the absence of Supreme Court opinion.
The debate over the Second Amendment is ultimately part of the larger debate over gun control, a debate about the extent to which the Amendment was either meant to be or should be interpreted as limiting the ability of government to prohibit or limit private ownership of firearms.
Waged in the popular press,  in the halls of Congress,  and increasingly in historical and p. They argue that, while maintaining a "well-regulated militia"  was the predominate reason for including the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights, it should not be viewed as the sole or p.
They argue that the framers also contemplated a right to individual and community protection. This debate has raised often profound questions, but questions generally treated hastily, if at all, by the community of constitutional scholars. If the Second Amendment was designed to ensure the existence of somewhat independent state militias immune from federal encroachment, then the question arises to what extent states are free to define militia membership.
Could a state include as members of its militia all adult citizens, thus permitting them an exemption from federal firearms restrictions? If, instead, the federal government has plenary power to define militia membership and chooses to confine such membership to the federally controlled National Guard, does the Second Amendment become a dead letter under the collective rights theory?
If the collective rights theory raises difficult questions, the individual rights theory raises perhaps even more difficult, and perhaps more interesting ones. Other questions are more elusive, more difficult to pose as well as to answer. At the heart of the individual rights view is the contention that the framers of the Second Amendment intended to protect the right to bear arms for two related purposes.
The first of these was to ensure popular participation in the security of the community, an outgrowth of the English and early American reliance on posses and militias made up of the general citizenry to provide police and military forces.
|Friday, October 28, 2005||Gun Control and the Constitution:|
|Civic Republicanism and the Citizen Militia: The Terrifying Second Amendment||All the tragic gun violence-related events that took place recently and not so recently led not only to grief but to all sorts of speculation on all levels. The topic has become so widely discussed that everyone has something to say on it:|
|Establishment Clause||Originally published as Yale L. For educational use only.|
|What's New||Text[ edit ] The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.|
The framers had firsthand experience with such a phenomenon, but they lived in an age when the weapon likely to be found in private hands, the single shot musket or pistol, did not differ considerably from its military counterpart. Although the armies of the day possessed heavier weapons rarely found in private hands, battles were fought predominately by infantry or cavalry with weapons not considerably different from those employed by private citizens for personal protection or hunting.
Where should the proper lines be drawn with respect to modern firearms, all of which employ technologies largely unimagined by the framers?
Second Amendment Tea Leaves for Corrigan, Sykes, Luttig and Alito: In Re Four Possible Supreme Court benjaminpohle.com the case of Love benjaminpohle.comack, Judge Luttig concurred in an opinion rejecting a section claim for an erroneous denial of a handgun license by the state of benjaminpohle.com Luttig's concurrence stated, in its entirity: "I concur only in the judgment reached by the majority, and I. Introduction The conventional wisdom, including statements by the U.S. Supreme Court, has academic freedom as a legal right, derived from the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, It expresses the principle of federalism and states' rights, which strictly supports the entire plan of the original Constitution for the United States of America, by stating that the federal government possesses only those powers delegated to it by the.
In the eighteenth century, the chief vehicle for law enforcement was the posse comitatus, and the major American military force was the militia of the whole. While these institutions are still recognized by modern law,  they lie dormant in late twentieth-century America.
Professional police forces and a standing military p. It is possible that the concept of a militia of the armed citizenry has been largely mooted by social change. Yet, the effect of social change on the question of the Second Amendment is a two-edged sword.
If one of the motivating purposes behind the Second Amendment was to provide a popular check against potential governmental excess, then does the professionalization of national and community security make the right to keep and bear arms even more important in the modern context?
Furthermore, the question remains whether the concept of a militia of the whole is worth re-examining: Did the framers, by adopting the Second Amendment, embrace a republican vision of the rights and responsibilities of free citizens that, despite the difficulties, should somehow be made to work today?
Finally, the Second Amendment debate raises important questions concerning constitutional interpretation, questions that need to be more fully addressed by legal historians and constitutional commentators.
It poses important questions about notions of the living Constitution, and to what extent that doctrine can be used to limit as well as extend rights. It also poses important questions about social stratification, cultural bias, and constitutional interpretation.
Many of the issues surrounding the Second Amendment debate are raised in particularly sharp relief from the perspective of African-American history. With the exception of Native Americans, no people in American history have been more influenced by violence than blacks.
Private and public violence maintained slavery.Liberty Library of Constitutional Classics. The following is a list of the classic books and other works on constitutional government, which we either include in .
Amendment XVII Popular Election of Senators Passed by Congress May 13, Ratified April 8, The 17th Amendment changed a portion of Article I, Section 3. The Charters of Freedom. The Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights, collectively known as the Charters of Freedom, have guaranteed the .
The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, It expresses the principle of federalism and states' rights, which strictly supports the entire plan of the original Constitution for the United States of America, by stating that the federal government possesses only those powers delegated to it by the.
Essay WORKS CITED  Cottrol, Robert, ed. Gun Control and the Constitution: Sources and Explorations on the Second Amendment. New York: Garland Publishing Inc.,  Dowlut, Robert. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms in State Bills of Rights and Judicial Interpretation.
SAF  Freedman, Warren. The Privilege to Keep and Bear Arms. benjaminpohle.com 7 Apr Page 3 of 59 Introduction Civil liberties expressed in the first ten Amendments to the U.S.
Constitution, including “due.