Barack Obama is President of the United States...

It is hard to believe that we have just experienced one of the most memorable, if not the most memorable, elections in the history of the United States.  Barack Obama is President.  Whether my blog topic, the Second Amendment gun control issue, had a huge part to play in this election, I'm not exactly sure; but, I'm sure it did make a difference, even if it were just a small difference.  It is unbelievable to see all the effort put into the campaigning for this election, especially being on a huge college campus in North Carolina.  And, North Carolina did go Democratic this year, with a 51% to 49% winning.  I would love to hear your personal feedback on this election!

Links posting...

I have used numerous websites to conduct my research for this blog so it has been hard to narrow it down to the most important links.  I have included the most informative websites that are extremely helpful in understanding this political issue. 

The first website is the "GunCite: gun control and Second Amendment issues."  This site is extremely informative because it gives insight to practically every aspect of the gun control issue.  This site is laid out in a way that is easy to navigate, making it extremely easy to assess information on a wide array of characteristics surrounding the issue.  Next, this site provides a multitude of accurate evidence that supports the claims made throughout the different informative sections.  Finally, as it reads at the top, this site is always under construction which shows the reader that the site is up to date and current with any new information regarding gun control.  

The second site that I used and found to be extremely informative was Barack Obama's webpage.  I did not realize this website was so beneficial until I reached the end of this blog project.  I wish I would have looked into Barack's site at the beginning of this project because his site gives specific details concerning his views on individual political issues.  There is a section on his site that talks about guns and his views concerning gun rights that clearly outlines his opinion on this issue.  I think that it is important to observe first hand each candidate's view on certain political issues because sometimes when we here information through other sources it is not accurate.

Finally, one of the other extremely informative website I have used throughout my research for gun control has been the Blogrunner website on "Gun Control." This site is different from most blogs in that there isn't an actual author who continues to post blogs daily.  This site consists of articles, documents, and other information that relates directly to gun control.  The site is updated almost every hour with new information.  I have used this site as a crucial part in maintaining the current information concerning gun control.

Analysis-driven post...

When I first chose this gun control topic at the beginning of the unit, I did not know a lot about the Second Amendment but from the small amount of information I did know, I assumed that the argument over control was basically an opinionated view on whether or not an individual had the right to own a gun.  Well, can I just say that there is a lot more to the topic then what I thought.  For most Americans, the issue of gun control is important to them as far as being able to own a gun, but the interpretation of the Second Amendment isn't as important.  After researching gun control continuously throughout the past couple of weeks, I have learned that this issue goes much deeper then a typical person's opinion on whether or not we should be able to own guns.  In fact, the issue with gun control comes down to the detailed interpretation of the Second Amendment.  the interpretation of the Second Amendment isn't just about the exact words in the writing, it is about so much more.  The interpretation of the Second Amendment deals with the time period in which it was written, the context of the wording, and the meanings and definitions of the words at the time they were written.  I think that most Americans today, including myself prior to this blog, have the tendency to interpret the Second Amendment as if it were written today, instead of taking into account that our meaning of militia today could be different then the meaning of militia when this amendment was written.

To begin with, I have learned that gun ownership throughout the Colonial Period was encouraged.  A quote from The Statutes at Large, Being a Collection of all of the Laws of Virginia, volume 6, page 338 shows that there was great pressure to have a gun, "Provided always, and be it enacted, That eighteen months time be given and allowed to each trouper and foot soldier not heretofore listed to furnish and provide himself with arms and ammunition according to this act, and that no trooper or foot soldier be fined for appearing without or not having the same at his place of abode until he hath been eighteen months listed."  Another quote from The Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, vol, 8, page 380, suggests gun ownership was encouraged as well, "That every listed souldier and other house- holder (except troopers) shall always be provided with and have the continual readiness, a well-fixed firelock... [and fines levied] for want of such arms and ammunition as is hereby required..."  Private gun ownership of military weapons for military purposes continued to be enforced during the post Revolutionary period as well.

Part of the argument also stems from the meaning of "militia" in the Second Amendment.  Those in opposition to an individuals right to own a gun argue that the "militia" is referring to those who are actively serving in a militia, such as today's National Guard.  They usually defend this claim by arguing that the militia equals the people or that the militia clause restricts gun ownership to "members only."  However, the militia and the people were not identical.  The "people," as referred to through the Bill of Rights were not considered militia members, yet they were considered freemen as individuals.  The Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights clearly identifies the people as having individual rights and freedoms, not just members of the militia.  And, in the Second Amendment, the "right to bear arms" is given to the people, not just members of the militia.  

I have also come to realize that it is beneficial to examine people who lived during the time the text was written and those who have commented on the text.  A man named Saint George Tucker, who lived from 1752-1828, served as a colonel in the Virginia militia and was wounded in the Revolutionary War.  He was also a justice on the Supreme Court from 1804 to 1811 and a friend of Thomas Jefferson.  He published a book in 1803 and in this book he discussed the Second Amendment.  In it he wrote, "This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty...the right of self defense is the first law of nature...Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, if not already annihilated, is one of the brink of destruction...but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have been interpreted to authorize the prohibition of keeping a gun or other engine of the game...so that not one man in five hundred can keep a gun in his house without being subject to a penalty."  Tucker murges self-defense, prevention of standing armies, and protection from oppression all into a single concept- the generalized concept right of keeping and bearing arms.  Also, Justice Story was appointed to the Supreme Court as an Associate Justice by James Madison in 1811, and in 1833 he wrote a commentary on the Constitution of the United States.  He writes about the Second Amendment and says, "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic."  It is clear, through the writings of two constitutional commentators, that there is strong evidence suggesting the Second Amendment calls for each individual to have the right to bear arms, not just those enrolled in a militia.  

I have also grown as a thinker because I have learned to thoroughly examine the opposition side to my personal opinion concerning political issues.  For example, there is a widespread misconception that ownership of guns leads to unnecessary deaths in self defense shootings.  However, evidence suggests otherwise.  According to Florida State University criminologist, Gary Kleck, evidence shows that "the myth that using a gun in self defense is more likely to result in injury or death to the victim or innocent bystanders and fail to successfully thwart the crime rather than the criminal," is just not true.  In the same study, Kleck also claims that less than 2% of fatal gun accidents occur during defensive gun use. 

On Barack Obama's website, there is a section directed specifically towards guns.  In this section, there is one particular paragraph that caught my attention.  Obama dissagreed with the NRA that "people should be unimpeded and unregulated on gun ownership."  Obama favors handgun registration and licensing requirements.  Concerning the interpretation of the Second Amendment as I have mentioned in the previous paragraphs, Obama says that he, "taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago and is thus familiar with the arguments regarding the right to bear arms.  He acknowledges 'a tradition of gun ownership in this country that can be respected,' and says that his academic studies convinced him gun ownership in this country is 'an individual right and not just that of a militia.' But he was not finished. 'Like all rights though, they are constrained by the needs and the rights of the community.' Obama then spoke of 34 students who were killed on the streets of Chicago and called for sensible gun control to prevent senseless death.  He speaks of the importance of parental involvement in education before listing the many ways in which he would expand the role of the federal government in the schools."

Through my examination of many different documents, historians, statistical facts, and political views, I have to come to understand that the Second Amendment carries much more background information then what seems to appear in the initial reading of the text.  Through this examination of the Second Amendment I have grown as a thinker in several ways.  First, I have learned to closely investigate the opinion of others before I automatically assume their viewpoints are invalid.  Next, by doing this, it has helped me to reevaluate my views of this political issue and many other political issues.  Finally, I have learned that there is so much more to words then what is written on the paper.  It is important to look at the time period in which the words were written and it is also important to understand the author's intentions in writing the material.  Overall, this blog project has truly helped me grow as a thinker and I hope to continue this growth as I continue post on my own blog and other blogs.

With November 4th being right around the corner, shouldn't each candidate be using everything they have to help win voters over?

My most recent post gave a clear depiction of Barack Obama's views concerning gun control and the Second Amendment, which calls for individuals to have the right to bear arms.  However, I find it extremely interesting that there has not been large amounts of information from this issue coming from John McCain's side of the spectrum.  In my opinion, there are clearly issues that each candidate can highlight or call attention to in order to show that they would make the best president.  Gun control is an issue that we would typically see the Repbulican candidate emphasizing in his political interviews and debates; but, this has not been the case with John McCain recently.  I have been putting lots of time into researching this issue and recently all I have been able to find are clips and interviews where Obama is addressing gun control rights.  Now, it is probable that Obama would be addressing this issue heavily knowing that it would be an issue that he may potentially loose some voters on, but I still think McCain should be addressing this topic more evidently.  We clearly know Sarah Palin's view concerning gun control and she presents her argument clearly, but why has there not been any recent ads or campaigning revolving around this issue?  McCain may feel that the issues he needs to be concerned with mostly are not those in which American people can automatically assume his stance towards gun control, due to earlier interviews, but I still believe McCain should be emphasizing his opinion concerning this issue more clearly.

Oprah endorses Obama for President...Obama talks about gun control...

For the first time ever, Oprah Winfrey endorses a presidential candidate.  This is the first time she has been publicly involved in politics.  Barack Obama has been on Oprah Winfrey's television show two times in the past.  Some may wonder if this will hurt Oprah's show in any way.  Oprah Winfrey has not had Sarah Palin on her show before and does not plan to until after November 4th, and if anything has hurt her show, it would be this.  The Oprah Show targets women viewers for the most part, so the fact that for the first time in America's history we have a woman running for the Vice President position and Oprah is not supporting her in any way is the reason why her shows ratings have gone down.  Although the ratings for Oprah's television show have decreased somewhat, it still remains as the top talk show in the country.  

When Obama campaigned in Pennsylvania he talked about gun control.  I think that I could summarize what Obama said concerning the matter but stating his own words in my opinion will get his point across more clearly.  So, according to this article, these are Obama's direct words concerning gun control...

"Here's what I believe: that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right and it means something that people have a right to bear arms."

"Their general attitude is...if you even breathe the word gun control or gun safety, then you must want to take away every body's guns.  Well, that's just not true."

"But what we have to understand is that there are two realities about guns in this country.  There's the reality of people who are lawfully and safely using guns for hunting and skeet shooting and protecting their families.  And you've got illegal handguns being dumped in Philadelphia, in the hands of teenage gang-bangers and drug dealers who are wreaking havoc and killing people.  And surely we can come up with a system that protects lawful gun owners but at the same time tries to do something about kids getting shot."

"Implications" Posting...lets talk about the future!

What is the future of this issue if it remains unresolved?  Well, to begin with, this issue isn't going to be completely solved unless each of the polar sides begins to step out and try to understand where the other side is coming from.  Basically, each side is fighting for one thing; one side is fighting to protect our gun ownership rights and the other side is fighting to protect our safety.  In my opinion, we can achieve both if each side compromises even just a small amount in their beliefs.  I think that individuals should have the right to own a gun, whether this be for sporting use or for safety use, and I believe that individuals can obey certain rules when it comes to owning and using these guns as well.  Also, as far as gun violence among young kids who accidentally get their hands a on a gun, parents need to step up and do a better job at hiding these guns in places where children can not get a hold of these guns.

If this issue remains unsolved, we are going to keep debating it over and over again and the people on each side of the issue are going to keep hating each other.  If each presidential candidate continues to choose a polar side on this issue, then there is going to be a continuous division among presidential candidates in the elections to come.  This issue will not be resolved unless we have some strong leaders who are willing to step up and provide a side to this issue that encompasses both political beliefs.  When it comes down to it, each side is fighting for safety and freedom.  Until we can come to a point where everyone understands this, a division among political parties regarding this issue will continue to cause controversy among the American people.

A New Gun Invention for the elderly?

So, apparently there is a new device called the "Palm Pistol."  This new device is designed to give the elderly and the physically disabled a gun that is easier for them to use.  The idea is that older people do need protection as well as younger people and it is not fair to them if they are unable to operate a regular gun that most average age people are capable of using.  So, the inventors of the Palm Pistol came up with this device to solve the problem.  Take a look!

Oh, and don't forget to check out the hilarious grandma video at the bottom...I'm not exactly sure how this video is even relevant to the new gun invention but it is still worth taking a look at!

Take a look at this video...

I was looking through another gun control blog and I came across this video...I did not know what to expect when I opened the icon but I was quite surprised at what I saw...I would like to hear some feedback on your opinions regarding this video...

Palin attacks Obama on Second Amendment...

Sarah Palin, has I have previously mentioned, has a strong opinion concerning our Second Amendment rights.  As a lifetime member of the NRA, she is definitely in favor of defending the Second Amendment right to bear arms.  Palin directly comes out and nails Obama on gun control rights during an interview on the Scott Hennen Show.  For a topic that has received a limited amount of attention in the current election campaign, I believe that it is good thing to see each candidate's position on this issue.  

Here's My Theory...

The Second Amendment has proved to be an extremely controversial political issue in our society today.  There are polarized sides to the interpretation of the Second Amendment.  In one hand, most democrats feel that the Second Amendment his giving our military the right to bear arms while most republicans feel that the Second Amendment is protecting an individuals right to bear arms.  Those that want to protect our right to own handguns, feel that if this right were stripped then we would not have a strong means of self defense.  On the other side, people feel that if individuals were not allowed to possess and own handguns within their own homes then the violence in our streets would decrease.  

In my opinion, taking away the right for an individual to own a gun is not going to decrease violence.  The individuals who are obeying the law and using their guns properly should not be penalized for those who misuse guns.  I think that using guns for sporting, hunting, and self defense reasons is  perfectly fine.  This is not to say that I do not think guns should be regulated.  I do agree that when an individual goes to purchase a firearm that they should have to register the gun.  If we want to decrease violence and death rates, we need to examine the reasons behind the shootings instead of trying to keep restricting gun rights.  

It seems to me that the opposing sides of this argument are forgetting to do one thing...they are forgetting to look at what they have in common.  Individuals are at completely different ends of the spectrum when it comes to gun control and if each side were to try to step in a little, they would see that they may actually have more in common then they previously thought.  First, everyone wants to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.  In my opinion, we can come to a compromise with this issue.  I think that it is possible, as shown in the D.C. v. Heller case, to give individuals the right to own guns, while also making it difficult for criminals to get their hands on guns by having strict gun regulation laws.  The D.C. v Heller case has been an extremely important case in the history of the interpretation of the Second Amendment and I think that it provides a perfect example of how it is possible to grant individuals gun rights while also pleasing those against gun control rights by having strict laws regarding who can own these guns.  The D.C. v Heller case is definitely going to be starting base for many gun control cases to come.  This case is definitely pointing the politics behind the Second Amendment in the right direction.

Prefer Videos to Written Text?

For any of you out there who prefer to watch videos rather than read large amounts of text concerning the different topics, then this is just the video for you.  ABC has provided a 5-minute video that incorporates the different views concerning the Second Amendment and the different interpretations regarding this controversial topic.  Take a look...

Taking a look at other blogs...

National Security

I have found the National Security blog to be extremely interesting.  I think that it is amazing how technology can interpret our reactions and through these interpretations our government security is able to pinpoint potential threats to our country.  This blog gives specific examples of national security techniques and how these techniques are implemented in everyday security methods throughout airports.  This blog is extremely thought-provoking and I would encourage others to read this blog because it gives great insight to National Security and topics concerning National Security.  

It's A Green World After All

This particular blog, It's A Green World After All, has caught my attention from the beginning.  To begin with, the title is extremely catchy, I mean I think that almost every American is familiar with the Disney song, "It's a Small World After All."  Anyways, getting past the title, this blog is extremely insightful and applicable to our everyday lives.  I find it so interesting that a small action, such as turning the water off when I brush my teeth, can make such a huge difference in conserving water and helping our environment.  This blog has allowed me to ask myself, "Am I really doing everything I can to conserve water and recycle?"  Most likely, every one's answer is probably no.  After reading this blog, I have become more aware of my own actions and I am more self conscious about throwing things away and recycling.  I have a strong appreciation for this particular blog, because even though recycling and water conservation don't seem extremely important, they really are and this blog does a great job at pointing this out.  I look forward to reading the upcoming posts!

Re-energize Tired Earth

I have found this blog to be extremely interesting.  I am definitely one of those people that believes in finding alternate energy sources.  I think that we should take care of our Earth so that it will be useful and beneficial for decades to come.  However, this blog provides an interesting perspective to the energy issue.  I learned that although we would love to be able to use tons of different energy sources, this is not as easy as it sounds.  In order to find alternate energy sources, the government would have to use large amounts of money to fund such projects.  It is almost illogical to use tons of other energy sources because of the negative effects such as large money costs.  This blog has provided me with an interesting perspective that I was unaware of...it is definitely worth taking a look at.

What Does Barack Think?

It has been extremely hard to determine exactly Barack Obama's opinions concerning the Second Amendment.  Obama has previously said that he does not intend on taking all guns out of the hands of Americans.  However, this article suggests otherwise...Take a look for yourself!! 

If the link doesn't try googling "One the Second Amendment, Don't Believe Obama!"

The NRA endorses McCain and Palin

On Thursday, October 9th, the NRA officially endorsed John McCain and Sarah Palin. The article discusses McCain and Palin and their devote devotion to gun control rights. According to the article, John McCain has voted pro-gun and pro-hunting for two decades. The article also points out that Sarah Palin is a gun owner, hunter, and lifetime member of the NRA.

According the information given, Barack Obama has a record of opposition to gun rights. Cox says, "Obama has voted to make self-defense with a firearm in the home illegal, has voted to ban the most commonly owned hunting shotguns, has voted to ban commonly owned hunting ammunition, and has supported a 500% tax increase on guns and ammunition. We will remind voters every single time he pretends that his anti-gun record doesn't exist."

Wow...this is very interesting...

As I was researching through some Second Amendment arguments, I came across this particular article. This is the first time I have come across an article in which women's rights have been closely linked with the Second Amendment. The writer of the article feels that women's safety will be jeopardized if Barack Obama becomes president. The article suggests that if gun control rights are extremely limited then women will not be able to protect themselves in necessary times, such as the one examined in the article. In today's society, I feel that it is important that women should be able to protect themselves when necessary; whether or not this requires gun use is a different story.

Take the time to look at this article...I am extremely interested to hear your feedback...

Just in case the URL for this article does not work, this is the title of the article so you can google it...Ballistic Obama Supporter Assaults Middle Aged Woman With Stick From Her McCain/Palin Sign

A Change of Topic...Nationalizing the Banks...

There is a financial crisis in the United States. The government is coordinating a plan to get the economy back on track. A plan was made. The United States will use a portion, $250 billion, of the $700 billion bailout money to implement this plan. The U.S. will purchase equity shares to inject capital into banks. This new capital will help strengthen financial institutions. It will allow banks to provide loans for large and small businesses.

This will fill holes caused by financial crisis. This is a short term measure to insure viability of America’s banking system. This will take effect immediately. Banks have been unable to borrow money. When money flow is more freely among banks, more Americans can borrow money to buy homes and other necessities.

The FDIC will expand government insurance to cover all non interest bearing accounts. These accounts are used for everyday actions among small businesses. This insurance will bring small banks a piece of mind. This will bring greater stability to the banking system.

The Federal Reserve will soon finalize work on a new program to serve as a buyer of last resort for commercial paper. The Federal Reserve will help American businesses meet payroll and purchase inventory and invest to create jobs. Each of these new programs contains safeguards to protect taxpayers.

Some people get a little crazy with their opinions concerning Gun Control...

Let's Analyze the Situation...

The controversy concerning the Second Amendment has been a continuous debate for many years. Although the Second Amendment gives individuals, "a right to bear arms," the interpretation of these words is where the debate lies. Many people interpret this amendment to mean that individuals have a right to own guns, as a mean for sporting use and self defense, and that the state and local governments should not have the ability to take away this right.


Others, however, feel that the Second Amendment is giving those in the military the right to possess guns and that personal gun ownership should be extremely limited. The debate also lies within each level of government and whose ability it is to enforce and interpret this law. Some feel that this is a law that should be interpreted by the national government, while others feel that this is a law that the state and local governments should have the ability to interpret and enforce. This has become such a controversial issue because as crime and violence rates continue to rise, it seems like the obvious answer would be to limit the use of firearms. However, should we be limiting the use of guns to those who use them correctly? Is it really fair to take away an individuals right when they have done nothing but obey the law?


In my opinion, I do not think this is fair. Through my interpretation of the Second Amendment and cases concerning the Second Amendment, I have come to the conclusion that this amendment was written so that each individual's freedom to own and properly use a gun would not be taken away. However, I am not saying that there should not be any laws regarding the use of guns. I personally feel that gun registration is important so that our government can keep track of specific weapons and so that our government can keep guns out of the hands of young children and teenagers. This has proved to be an important issue in the 2008 election due to the downward spiral of America's economy. With the economy being in such bad shape, the crime rate and theft rate have skyrocketed. In my hometown there has been more robberies and break-ins than ever before. People are losing their jobs and loosing money and they are becoming desperate for ways to stay financially stable. With an unstable economy that is pushing people to find money desperately, it is important for individuals to have personal guns as a means for self defense. If someone breaks into a home, how will the family protect themselves without having some type of weapon to use? Gun control is an extremely important issue that can have great effects so it is extremely important for each individual to form their own opinions regarding this issue and truly find out for themselves which candidate supports their opinions concerning the matter.


It is very clear the position John McCain and Sarah Palin have taken on the Gun Control Issue. Sarah Palin believes in our Second Amendment right to bear arms. She thoroughly explains her views to Charlie Gibson on ABC. She is a life-time member of the NRA and feels strongly about our Second Amendment right to own guns. She talks about how it is apart of the culture in Alaska who rely on guns for self protection, sporting use, and for hunting use. Palin argues that those who misuse guns are not going to stop misusing guns if the government starts to put even more and more laws on gun use and ownership. In her opinion, it is not fair to take guns out of the hands of people who use them correctly.



John McCain agrees with the ruling of the District of Columbia vs. Heller Case regarding the Second Amendment. Therefore, it is clear that McCain interprets the Second Amendment to mean that individuals have the right to bear arms. Obviously, sense the Supreme Court made the final decision, John McCain feels that it is the National Government's role to interpret the Second Amendment and what it means for each individual.


However, Barack Obama was not aware of the details of this case, and therefore was unable to form his stance on this particular issue. This case, which was currently under Supreme Court ruling at the time, is one of the most important cases involving the interpretation of the Second Amendment. I find it hard to believe that Barack Obama can thoroughly form an opinion on gun control and what the Second Amendment means to Americans without knowing what is currently taking place in the Supreme Court regarding gun control.

From the information he has provided on this topic, Senator Barack Obama does not intend on taking guns out of the hands of Americans. Yet, he does intend on placing several laws on an individual's right to bear arms and Obama does have gun control groups to support him. Barack also argues that it is the right of the state and local governments to constrain these rights and control how guns are used. Charlie Gibson asks Barack if he believes there should be mandatory registration for all guns. Obama does not directly answer this question which makes his view and stance on gun control unclear. Barack appeals to the "sportsmen" crowd by stating that he feels that it is important for many Americans to be able to fish, hunt, and take their kids out to teach them how to use a gun. However, the NRA (Natioanl Rifle Association) is doing everything in their power to put down Obama. There are also many people who feel that Obama is "trying to destroy the Second Amendment." I would not interpret Obama's statements concerning Gun Control to mean he is literally trying to take every individuals right to own a gun away, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Another outlook...District of Columbia v. Heller

District of Columbia v. Heller

District of Columbia v. Heller

The District of Columbia v. Heller is an important Supreme Court case in the background history of the Second Amendment.  This case was argued on March 18, 2008 and a decision was made on June 26, 2008.  The District of Columbia law prohibits people from carrying an unregistered firearm and prohibits them from registering handguns.  The law says that no person may carry an unregistered handgun, but the police chief is allowed to issue 1-year licenses.  However, even if a person has a 1-year license, all their firearms must be unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock at all times.  A special policeman, Respondent Heller, applied to register a handgun of his that he wished to keep at home.  His registration was denied by the District.  Respondent Heller responded to this refusal by filing a suit that the Second Amendment does in fact protect our right to private gun ownership.  The District Court dismissed the suit, but the D.C. Circuit reversed the decision, determining that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess firearms.  The D.C. Circuit felt that the District Courts decision to have a total ban on handguns and their idea to have a requirement that firearms in the home be kept nonfunctional was violating our rights in the Second Amendment.  The final decision was by the D.C. Circuit saying that we as individuals have the right to possess firearms, due to the Second Amendment.  

I completely agree with the outcome of this case.  In my opinion, the Second Amendment is basically saying that we as individuals have the right to own and possess a licensed firearm.  I think that the Second Amendment allows us to have a personal gun as a means for self defense so that we can feel safe within our own homes.

Interesting Article

Exact Wording of the 2nd Amendment in the U.S. Constitution

2nd Amendment

Here's the Deal...

Legal scholars and citizens of the Unites States continue to disagree about the true meaning behind the United States Second Amendment: Our right to bear arms. On one end of the spectrum, scholars feel that it is only the secluded right of members of the militia to possess firearms. On the other end of the spectrum, scholars feel that it is an individuals right to gun ownership.

With the rising violence in today's society, the debate over the rhetoric of the Second Amendment continues to take place. Basically, it comes down to the fact that the authors of the Second Amendment were not as clear in their wording as our government would have liked. Was this amendment created to protect the right of individuals to own firearms or was it to ensure that our military have the necessary weapons to maintain a strong defense?

SECOND AMENDMENT

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.