We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
IS THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS AN EXAMPLE OF "UNPOPULAR CONSTITUTIONALISM"?: COMPARING MODERN AND HISTORICAL OPINIONS ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT.
- Authors
Check, Terence
- Abstract
There are two major schools of thought on the meaning of the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. The individualist view believes that the Amendment provides a private right to bear arms for all citizens, so that they may have means for their own self-defense. The collectivist view constrains the right to a strictly military context. Each view relies on the history of the Second Amendment and the beliefs of the Framers to give greater legitimacy to their particular, modern conceptions of the constitutional right. This article sets out to steer the debate regarding the Second Amendment away from historical debate, and urges the consideration of a larger question: If historical intentions and modern popular opinions are incongruent, should the Framer's views still matter?
- Subjects
UNITED States; UNITED States. Constitution. 2nd Amendment; GUN laws; FIREARMS ownership laws; CIVIL rights; SELF-defense
- Publication
Faulkner Law Review, 2015, Vol 6, Issue 2, p283
- ISSN
2160-2328
- Publication type
Article