미국 연방헌법 수정조항 제2조

The Second Amendment to the U. S. Constitution: Arguments for Gun Control and the Ideology of Self-Defense

No Constitution is as frequently invoked and misunderstood as the Second Amendment. Political arguments for gun control, mostly debates on the right to bear arms, center on the Second Amendment. The original intention of the Founding Fathers and the concurrent interpretation of the Amendment remain inconclusive. By tracing scholarly works on the history and politics of Second Amendment, the past decisions of Supreme Court, and the intellectual and political climate of the late eighteenth century in America, this article is to discuss whether the Second Amendment protects individual's right to arm or preserves states' right to maintain a militia. This will bring deeper insight to the main ideology of the Second Amendment. Natural law philosophers perceived self-defense as an inherent right, which brought forth a variety of other rights, the "right to arm" being the primary importance. Greatly influenced by John Locke and Blackstone, the Founding Fathers saw the individual's right to arm equivalent to the right to self-defense. In absence of law enforcement, Americans bore arms to protect self and their community. This brought young men to posse comitatus and formation of militia, subduing criminals and establishing law and order. Thus long before the Second Amendment was introduced, the right to arm already preexisted in American common law. A wide range of views exists regarding the Second Amendment, but most scholars come to agreement that it preserves and guarantees the pre-existing individual's right to arm. This view was echoed by the Founding Fathers who believed possession of arms is crucial to self-defense and to prevent a tyranny from overpowering the people. This view was also confirmed by the Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008, which claimed "gun ownership is a constitutional right."