Fight To The Death

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, [and] the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

-The Second Amendment; Constitution.

In the United States, the ability to bear arms and form militia is a right given to American citizens through the constitution. Citizens have been practicing this right for hundreds of years. The repercussions of gun ownership in modern day society have changed the way some people look at the situation. Issues of recklessness and violence have called out policy makers to find ways to amend an amendment to the constitution. With gun control, lawmakers want to limit and manage guns and the ways we use them. Citizens concerned with the protection of their rights and gun ownership are addressing the nature of gun violence, the reasons of violence in society, and challenging lawmakers in legislation.

High-profile gun violence has focused the national spotlight on gun control and safety. Incidents of school and public shootings, accidental and homicidal deaths, and media stream of shows and video games promoting negative images of the use of guns has stirred up much debate. Lawmakers are receiving increased pressure from society to set federal gun control legislation. Congress has taken action in settling the problem with policy legislation such as "The National Firearms Act of 1937" and "Assault Weapons Ban of 1994." Need for control of gang activity, killings, and from the 1930's to the present has invoked measures banning possession of destructive devises that can cause harm in society.

Many groups have taken a side against federal action on gun control. Groups such as the NRA, who led debates and regulate the issue, have taken pains to ensure that the rights of gun ownership and principles of the constitution are not changed. Members of the NRA include many extremists, ordinary citizens and high-ranking officials in our government. Individual-rights proponent Joyce Lee Malcolm, a Bentley College history professor, best summarizes a defensive side of gun control. Malcolm contends "an individual right to weapons are a clearly established principle when the Founding Fathers met to create the U.S. Constitution." The use of guns, and functions of militia have changed entirely from what they where first used for. To better understand what the writers of the constitution intended in the second amendment, it is best to look at the time period from when it was created.

The second amendment brings out much confusion to what is being said in the constitution and how it should relate to society. When the constitution was being written by wise men, men of politics and philosophers, they where in a state of reform from a government that was infringing their rights. The need for revolution from a corrupt and controlling, overseas stranglehold was vital to the survival of the United States during the Revolutionary War. When writing the phrase "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state," The fore fathers where looking at the aspect that revolution through a militia was the answer to their corrupt government. They deliberated heavily on the fact that the government shall not infringe the rights of individuals, and if any rights where taken away from its citizens then citizen have the ultimate right to form militia. The United States government and military are strong forces. Some people don't believe the corrupt nature of government, believing propaganda is misleading its citizens; this is not the fact.

The right to keep guns is not just an issue of individual security; it also pertains to the right of revolution. Even though the United States government would love to abolish the right of revolution; it cannot. If the government ever attempts to take freedom away from its civilians, the civilians have right to peacefully assemble (first amendment to the constitution), and form a well-regulated militia (according to the second amendment). The right the constitution gives its people is the freedom of civilians against a tyrannical government. History has proven that the government is not always right when it comes to decisions and policies. Taking away of certain freedoms is constitutionally illegal, and when laws are created they must coincide with the foundation of laws that created this nation. A collective-rights defender Garry Wills has interestingly remarked about the constitution. "You can't read the amendment apart from the body of the Constitution," he wrote, "and the body of the Constitution defines taking up arms against the United States as treason." [A Necessary Evil: A History of American Distrust of Government (1999)]

Language and literal meanings