With the different interpretations of the Second Amendment, as well as the different opinions on it whether people want to uphold or abolish it, several questions may arise as to why it became an amendment, especially the second of everyone, as well as questions about who and what it helps and how it can hurt people. Through research and asking these questions we can find the answers to support our beliefs and show what it does as it relates to today. From why it was founded, to the importance of the Second Amendment, to how it impacts people on a daily basis. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The Second Amendment is a controversial topic among many, whether they want it eliminated completely, whether they want it for hunting, or whether others want it to protect themselves from external threats to themselves. From the reason it was founded and placed as the most important second amendment, even the amount of court rulings on citizens' rights are taken away from them on purpose or without knowing it. Even the amount of mass shootings that have occurred over the past few decades, even law abiding citizens' firearms are taken away through laws to protect others. These are frequently asked questions that can be answered or not. Through the beginning of the colonies and the Revolutionary War, the reasoning why the Founding Fathers created the Second Amendment can be told in many ways and through different opinions. Our Founding Fathers had a purpose in creating the 2nd Amendment, for primarily defense reasons. Stating that "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." Some argue that the phrase “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms” refers to an individual's constitutional right to own firearms. While others believe that the phrase “a well-regulated militia necessary to the security of a free state” refers to the state's constitutional right to have a militia. In 1775, General Gage ordered the citizens to surrender all their weapons to Boston. During the shift the citizens handed over 38 arquebuses, 634 pistols, 973 bayonets and 1778 muskets and were promised that they would eventually be returned. After ratifying the Constitution, James Madison proposed the 2nd Amendment to provide states with more power over their militias. This was a middle ground for Federalists – citizens who supported the Constitution, and Anti-Federalists – citizens who opposed the Constitution. The reason for this is that the colonists just fought off the English using their muzzle-loading rifles, so the 2nd amendment gave them the ability to be able to defend themselves, as well as fight a tyrannical government (Brooks, 2017). If these were the reasons why they created the Second Amendment, then what was the reason for making it the second most important. Given what the framers of the constitution had to go through, can you see why they would do this? as the most important second amendment in the Bill of Rights. The framers of the Constitution felt it was important to place the 2nd Amendment as our number two, right after the 1st Amendment, which protects freedom of the press, religion, speech, and so on. After having to defend themselves from the British Army, the most feared army in the world, and fighting against the king to have their rights in their new land, the founding fathers had to insert a sentence that defended their right to defend themselves . When the founding fathersthey started their own government, they wanted to make sure they preserved the right to keep and bear arms. As an American you have the natural right to be able to defend yourself and your property from anything tyrannical, be it foreign or domestic. In the Bill of Rights, the 2nd Amendment was included more to help the concerns of citizens of all states. From what they've been through, how can the Second Amendment guarantee anyone's individual right? How the Second Amendment guarantees a citizen the right to own firearms, especially for reasons of self-defense and hunting. The 2nd Amendment can have many interpretations for many different people depending on their ideology and opinions on the topic. For 200 years, or more, with much debate and even more legislative action, no real resolution has been reached by the courts as to what rights the 2nd Amendment protects, whether purchasing, carrying, and owning firearms and their regulations. The 2nd Amendment is made up of two parts, the opening clause which states: “A well regulated militia, necessary to the security of a free state” which can give meaning to the constitutional right of a state, and the closing clause which is: “the right of the persons who keep and bear arms shall not be violated” which may give meaning to a citizen's personal constitutional right. Although the Second Amendment guarantees the individual rights of citizens, it guarantees the rights of states to their own militia the Second Amendment to guarantee a State's right to a militia, even after the Revolutionary War, how does the Second Amendment protect that right? Affirming from the 2nd Amendment that "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" . Under Article 1, Section 8 provided constitutional control to discipline, organize, and arm the federal militia. In addition to checking the power of the federal government, the 2nd Amendment also gives governments within the states the power to oppose the general government in case of tyranny, in what Luther Martin (1744/48-1826) called “the last coup de grace”. It also sanctioned the constitutional rule of the militaristic virtues of ancient Rome and Floratine according to which every citizen is a soldier and vice versa. Since the writing of the Second Amendment there have always been court rulings on what was right and what was wrong. How the Supreme Court has decided its opinion on how the Second Amendment should be put into practice over the past few decades, whether it is to possess something specific or for defense use. Before 2008, when the trial took place, the District of Columbia had a law that made it illegal to carry unregistered firearms and prohibited the registration of all handguns. It also allows the police chief to issue one-year licenses, while no one can carry without one. It also requires that all civilians who legally own a firearm be unloaded, fully disassembled and stowed, or have a trigger. A District of Columbia police officer wanted and attempted to register a gun for home use, but the district rejected him. The officer filed a lawsuit claiming, due to the Second Amendment, that the law went against the Second Amendment rights of every citizen. The District of Columbia court dismissed the suit, but the Circuit reversed, holding that the Second Amendment protects a citizen's right to own and possess firearms and that the District's blanket ban on firearms, as well as regulations on firearms kept in homes, is deemed unconstitutional. In 1982 Chicago passed a law banning new registration of handguns and returnsregistration is a pre-qualifying step for owning a firearm. The case arose in 2008 when Otis Mcdonald and others filed a lawsuit against Chicago. Each suit argued that the law passed in Chicago violated citizens' rights to keep and bear arms and firearms, which the Court had found protected by the Second Amendment. In 2016, a man named Jamie Caetona was convicted of possessing a stun gun in Massachusetts. Jamie Caetona appealed to state court, arguing that his conviction violated his Second Amendment rights. The Massachusetts Supreme Court found that the stun gun Jamie Caetona was in possession of was not protected by the Second Amendment. The United States Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment effectively protects his right to own a stun gun because the Second Amendment extends to weapons that did not exist. In the state of New York, you must obtain a license to possess a firearm. To obtain a firearms license you must obtain it from your local licensing officer, which in New York City is the police commissioner. The law allows two types of licenses, one is a transport license and the other is a premises license. This case is about licensing requirements, or how licensed people can only take their guns, unloaded and locked in a case, and from their home to one of the city's seven shooting ranges. It is not permitted to carry the said gun outside the city premises or into other households that the person may own. This case was opened in 2019 and has yet to be decided. Through the use of the Second Amendment, criminals have been given a means to be able to commit crimes and murders more easily and to be able to cause more deaths more easily. The cause of mass shootings over the decades may be due to a multitude of reasons, all stemming from the use of the Second Amendment. Mass shootings, once a rare event, now occur more frequently in the United States. With each mass shooting that occurs, citizens and political figures are becoming more open to possible solutions to increased mental health concerns and restrictive gun control. Mental illness has recently been the top issue that people thought was the reason for mass shootings. In reality, approximately 3-5% of all violent crimes, including mass shootings, can be linked to mental illness. Another area that people tend to blame is video games, where through research no link has been found between video games and firearm ownership. The final area of ​​criticism would be gun laws. It has been shown that states that have looser gun laws, which are not as strict as other states show, have more gun violence than states that have stricter gun laws (Understanding Gun Violence and Mass Shootings, 2019). Senseless violence through the use of firearms has always happened, in the present day and in times past. If the United States were to abolish the Second Amendment, the use of firearms in senseless violence would have a chance of decreasing. The senseless violence created through the use of firearms will have very little chance of ending if the Second Amendment is abolished. For reasons such as the number of citizens who own them, what are currently called “ghost guns” can be considered high even if there are no real numbers to support this. Another reason is that if the Second Amendment were to be abolished, the number of citizens who actually.