Right to Bear Arms

The following essay in my series "The Founding Fathers and the U.S. Constitution," delberates as to what the founding fathers original intentions were in the second amendment. There have been several U.S. Supreme Court decisions with regard to the interpretation of the second amendment.



The Second Amendment states:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,

the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

This issue has been discussed and debated since the writing of the Constitution. There appears to be no definitive decision. There has always been the age old question as to whether or not the Founding Fathers were stating that only a state militia or National Guard, meaning states rights, could possess firearms or did they mean that individual citizens could own firearms, meaning individual rights.
The U.S. Supreme Court decisions with regard to the possession of firearms has been elusive to say the least. Second Amendment decisions have covered the spectrum according to which court was hearing the argument. Some courts have stated that the second amendment provides protection to militias for the defense of the state and other court opinions have interpreted the amendment as protection for the private citizen to own a firearm for the purpose of self-defense.
The most current U.S. Supreme Court decision in reference to the possession, transporation, and selling of firearms was established by the John Roberts Court. In a case entitled, District of Columbia v. Heller case number: 07-290. The decision states that the District of Columbia's prohibition on the possession of usable handguns in the home violates the second amendment of the U.S. Constitution, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of mmediate self-defense. The second amendment protects the individuals right to possess a firearm unnconnected with service in a militia, and use that firearm for traditional lawful purposes such as self-defense.
At least for the time being the right to bear arms as an individual is upheld to be constitutional. If the Obama Administration and the United States Attorney General Eric Holder are able to make their ideological beliefs pervasive throughout the three branches of government there could possibly be a time in which the current court decision could be reversed. More than likely there is no panacea to resolve this issue in the forseeable future.