political response 3 - Political Science 496 Michael Noeske...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Political Science 496 Michael Noeske Weekly Response Paper February 5, 2012 Local gun restrictions and the second Amendment McDonald v. Chicago was a U.S. Supreme Court case decided on in 2010. The part of the constitution that is in question for this Supreme Court case is the Bill of Rights, specifically, the second amendment. Furthermore, the Supreme Court drew from Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to justify their action taken on the case, which was upholding an individual’s right to own a handgun. My personal political opinion about the government action taken in this case is that the decision reached by the Supreme Court was the correct one. To begin with, the wording of the second amendment is very clear, “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.” This states that as citizens of the United States, we have the fundamental right to keep and bear arms, and it cannot be infringed upon, even by state laws. Furthermore, I believe it should be noted that the
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/14/2012 for the course POLISCI 496 taught by Professor Jackson during the Winter '08 term at University of Michigan.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online