What Is The Primary Interpretation Of The Second Amendment Essay

James Madison proposed the Second Amendment after the Constitution was ratified as a way to provide power to state militias, today known as the National Guard. The Second Amendment has two different interpretations. One interpretation suggests that it is made for common rights, while others say it is for personal rights. On the common right side, the clause “a well-regulated militia” would mean that the right to bear arms is for the National Guard, not the individual citizen. The right of the “ regulated militia” to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It would make sense if this is what the Anti-Federalists meant when they included this amendment. This interpretation gives the state's more power because the federal government

Up until recently, the primary interpretation of the Second Amendment had been, but it was not fundamental to liberty, unlike other amendments in the Bill of Rights such as freedom of speech or freedom of religion. The Second Amendment could be up to the states to interpret, and the states could be allowed it to impose restrictions on the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court case of Presser V Illinois defined what a well-regulated militia was. Herman presser gathered German-Americans and trained them in military drills and maneuvers. He wanted to build his own well-regulated militia to combat security firms that were hired to break strikes and intimidate employees. Pressure and 400 other Germans marched through Chicago, and he was arrested for violating the state's laws against military organizations. The Supreme Court eventually ruled at the states were able to regulate and ban private militias in their state, the Supreme Court also ruled that the citizens had no right to bear arms the purposes of hunting or self-defense. In the court case United States V Miller in 1939, two bank robbers or stopped by