March 2nd, 2010

Gun Control and 2^nd Amendment Assessed by Supreme Court.  The right to bear arms has long been an American right.  In recent years, talk of gun control has increased and is very controversial.  On one hand, there’s a group of citizens that are concerned with increasing crime rates, particularly in inner city areas.  On the other hand, there are a group of individuals who will stop at nothing to ensure that the second amendment in its current form stays intact.

There’s a delicate balance to consider.  Will banning inexpensive firearms that are currently relatively easy to get – such as the Chicago handgun ban- decrease crime, or leave innocent citizens vulnerable if attacked?

The Chicago handgun law ban, which was passed some 28 years ago, is the subject of the Supreme Court case, due largely in part to a study which indicated that Chicago is actually more dangerous now after the ban than it was before.

So much lies in the interpretation of the second amendment.  As it stands now, the right to bear arms is an individual right.  However, some of the wording in the amendment itself lends proponents of gun control to point out that the right to bear arms lies within a militia which must protect individuals.   

There’s also the issue as to how far the federal law will reach.  Will states and localities such as Chicago be able to set gun control laws, or will it be up to the federal government? If it’s up to the federal government, it could mean that Chicago’s over       quarter century old law could be repealed.  If it’s not up to the federal government, states and municipalities can pass stronger gun control laws that will forever change the landscape of America.

What are your thoughts on gun control? Do you think that everyone should have the right to bear arms, or do you think that gun control laws would be a good thing?
Source:

CNN

Photo Credit: Morguefile.com free photo