The Second Amendment is part of the United States Bill of Rights. It protects our right to keep and bear arms. It was adopted Dec. 15, 1791, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights.

In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court issued two Second Amendment-related decisions. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Court ruled the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Additionally, the Court enumerated several longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession. In McDonald v. Chicago (2010), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government in prohibiting lawful firearm possession.

The right to have arms is believed to have been regarded as a long-established natural right in English law. The English Bill of Rights emerged from a chaotic period in English politics during two issues were major sources of conflict: The authority of the King to govern without the consent of Parliament; and the role of Catholics in a country that was becoming Protestant.

Ultimately, James II (who was Catholic) was overthrown in the Glorious Revolution. His successors, the Protestants William III and Mary II, accepted the conditions of the English Bill of Rights. One of the issues was the authority of the King to disarm its subjects, as James II had attempted to disarm many Protestants and had argued with Parliament over his desire to maintain a standing army. The English Bill of Rights stated it was acting to restore “ancient rights” trampled upon by James II, though some have argued that it created a new right to have arms developed out of a duty to have arms. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court did not accept this view, remarking that the English right at the time of the passing of the English Bill of Rights was “clearly an individual right, having nothing whatsoever to do with service in the militia” and that it was a right not to be disarmed by the crown, not the granting of a new right to have arms.

Although there is little doubt that the writers of the Second Amendment were heavily influenced by the English Bill of Rights, it is a matter of interpretation as to whether they were intent on preserving the power to regulate arms to the states (as the English Parliament had reserved for itself against the king) or whether the intent was to create a new right akin to the right of others written into the Constitution (as the Supreme Court recently decided).

If you have a question or a topic you would like for me to discuss, please e-mail me at givenslaw@tds.net. To read previous Legal Ease articles, visit www.centrelawyer.com.