The Second Amendment gives the legislative foundation for US gun regulations. This is a significant set of norms that the citizens utilize in their 21st-century lives. However, in truth, neither side’s stance in the current gun-control debate was significantly influenced by the issues faced by the Founding Fathers.
In reality, the Second Amendment’s main objective was to stop the US from becoming a conventional military state. Not many people in the 18th century were as terrifying as the standing army, which was made up of professionals who served full-time (Brooks). It is difficult to rekindle this terror in modern times. Any nation with a large military could never be fully free, according to the thinking of the 18th century. The persons in control of that army may give orders for it to assault the populace directly. Since they are unprepared and defenseless, they would be powerless to defend themselves. Because of this, a well-managed militia was essential to the safety of a free nation (Brooks). A community had to be capable of defending itself in order to feel safe. To be free, it could not depend solely on a standing military and its commanders. Citizens had to be prepared to protect their civilization, well-organized, and equipped if they wanted to live in freedom and security. A national military or a free country were the options to choose between.
Moreover, the Second Amendment keeps the government limited to an exact extent. In general, the right to bear arms relates to a person’s ability to own weapons. The Supreme Court has always viewed the right to keep and bear arms as a personal right to self-defense, making it extraordinarily challenging for Congress to control firearms.
Work Cited
Brooks, Chad. “The Second Amendment & the Right to Bear Arms.” Live Science, Web.