One of the most widely debated issues in our society is the regulation of firearms and whether that regulation is an infringement on the Constitutional right to bear arms. Though gun restrictions are put in place for the safety of both buyer and purchaser, there are a number of reasons these laws actually go against the Second Amendment rights of every American citizen.
Throughout the years, language has changed, and this includes the context in which the words of a language have been used. During the 18th century when the Constitution was forged, the term “regulated” did not mean what it means today. It did mean uniform or well-rehearsed, while today the word means adjusted by method, rules or forms. According to the clause on regulation, the government should promote private ownership, not restrict it. These restrictions are the opposite of what was set forth.
Throughout the Bill of Rights, each individual right refers to the rights of the citizens, the people individually rather than the rights of a collective, such as a militia or the military. No one challenges any individual right as a collective right, as opposed to the rights of a group. The majority of the rights listed in this document are focused on the individual rights of a citizen rather than a collective, so why is it this right is the only right people attempt to place into a group right as opposed to individually?
The latter half of the Second Amendment states “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed”. Not only does this statement clearly express individual right to own firearms, but also that the right itself shall not be infringed. It describes the protection of this right – an individual, private ownership of firearms.