Right To Bear Arms Under The Constitution

Should our right to bear arms have limits?

According to the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, “fundamental rights” may include, but are not limited to, the right to vote, the right to run for public office, the right to marry or divorce, and the right to fairness in our criminal justice system.

Webster’s New World Law Dictionary defines a fundamental right as “A basic or foundational right, derived from natural law; a right deemed by the Supreme Court to receive the highest level of Constitutional protection against government interference”.

Our Constitution was originally written without any "Amendments", but we were not satisfied that these original words were clear enough to convey the actual intended purpose, so some changes were necessary and the "Amendments" were added. Since these "Amendments" can't really stand on their own, they must be a further explanation or clarification of some other part of the Constitution, right?

So what are these "Amendments" amending?

Let's take a look at the original Constitution:

Article I, Section 8 of our Constitution reads, in part:

"To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"

Domestic Violence And The Right To Bear Arms

Should domestic violence impact our right to bear arms?

The thought of any man or woman intentionally inflicting violence or abuse in any domestic relationsip is appalling.

Oftentimes, domestic violence begins in a less physical manner with emotional and psychological attacks on the victim, but in many cases of domestic violence the violent behavior will escalate to making threats with guns or other weapons. In many cases these threats are actually carried out.

If we were to make a decision based solely on our logic and our feelings, most of us would probably say that anyone who engages in violent behavior in a marital or live-in relationship, should not have access to a lethal weapon. That would make very good sense.

Whether or not a person "accused" of domestic violence should lose the right to bear arms brings up two very complex and very different issues.