S. V Cruikshank Case
The United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights was an elaborate document for its time. This document was the beginning of a revolutionary country, one that was formed from brave men and women who gave their lives so that we the people of the United States may live in a free nation today. The framers of the United States Constitution were all very intelligent men and knew what it would take to create and keep a strong free society. That is why the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution gives the people of the United States the right to bear arms. In this paper I am going to discuss and validate the American people’s right to maintain firearms for their own personal protection.
The United States of America was forged out of a raw and wild land; the main tool that was used for this forging process was the gun. Prior to the settlers arriving in the new world, North America was a land governed by Native Americans that had little law and order. When the first settlers arrived guns helped to protect them, allowed them to …show more content…
kill enough wild game to survive and to push west. As the settlers moved west, they established new territories and guns helped to establish law and order. As more settlers arrived in America to gain religious freedom and to escape the oppression of the monarchy governments; the English colonies grew in population and size.
England started to impose harsh laws on the colonies, and then in 1775 the colonist retaliated by defying the English government and seizing control of the thirteen colonial governments. The colonists then set up the Second Continental Congress and formed the Continental Army lead by George Washington. Then in 1776 the colonies declare independence from England by signing the Declaration of Independence and formally calling the new nation the United States of America. From 1775 to 1783 the Revolutionary War was fought between the United States and Britain. It was a long and bloody war that proved to be very costly for both sides. Britain won most of the major battles between the two nations but it was General Washington’s resiliency and the nation’s minutemen that out lasted the British (O’Connor, Sabatol, 2008).
In 1783 the war finally ended and England officially surrendered the colonies to the United States in the signing of the Treaty of Paris. For the first time the United States of America was recognized by the Treaty of Paris as an independent sovereign country. After the Revolutionary war ended, the usefulness of the gun continued to be a viable asset in the American way of life. With the continued expansion of the country all the way to the pacific coast, guns once again helped men tame the western frontier and bring civilization to millions of acres of wilderness. Then on September 17, 1787 the United States Constitution was adopted at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. It would then take over two years for all thirteen states in the union to ratify the United States Constitution and for it to become the law of the land (O’Connor, Sabatol, 2008).
At that time the Constitution had only ten Amendments, which was known as the Bill of Rights. Out of those ten Amendments, the one amendment that has helped shape our country and is often the topic of controversy today is the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment states that a well regulated Militia is necessary for the security of a free state and the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Since the framers of the Constitution were all primarily of English descent and mostly all of their legal ideology came from English law. It would be common knowledge to say that the second amendment gets its origins from English common law and the right to bear arms can be traced back to the times of King Henry II. During the time of King Henry II in 1181, the King required all knights and freemen to bear arms in service of him (Spitzer, 2001).
Then in 1689 England created an English Bill of Rights that gave protestant people the right to bear arms suitable for their own defense. For over two hundred years guns have helped forge the United Sates into the nation it is today and they have protected its shores from enemies foreign and domestic. Today some people argue that the America gun culture has out served its usefulness, they say that guns should remain in the past and not be part of everyday American life in the present. Other people say that they have an inherit right under the Constitution to own a gun, and that the Second Amendment was very clear in stating that the right of the people to bear arms, shall not be infringed. Even after looking at the history of how guns have evolved in the United States and the history of the framers of the Constitution. It is still partially unclear to a large number of people what exactly does the Second Amendment say. Whether someone is a gun control advocate or a pro gun advocate, both sides have interpreted the Second Amendments meaning to legitimize their agenda.
To look for legal answer on interpreting laws, Americans have traditionally looked for the courts for answers. The problem with getting a clear straight answer on the Second Amendment is that there has not been allot of court rulings on it. The United States Supreme court has ruled on the Second Amendment only five times since the ratification of the Constitution and has refused to hear one case. The cases that they have ruled on are the U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876), Presser v. Illinois (1886), Miller v. Texas (1894), U.S. v. Miller (1939), and Lewis v. U.S. (1980). The Supreme Court refused to hear the case of Burton v. Sills (1968) (GunCite, 2007)
The first Supreme Court case to involve the Second Amendment was U.S.
v. Cruikshank (1876). This case took place during the Reconstruction period of the south in Grand Parish, Louisiana. During this time there were many changes being made in the state and local government positions. In 1873 the governor of Louisiana appointed a new Judge and Sheriff for the Grand Parish, Louisiana area. White men in that area that were part of the Klu Klux Klan had threatened to burn down the local court house and take control of the government in retaliation for the governor’s action. The new sheriff and his posse that was made up of freed black man guarded the parish court house for three weeks. Then on April 13, 1873 the Klu Klux Klan with over a hundred men attacked the court house and burned it to the ground. In the aftermath of the attack over sixty black men had been killed, W.J. Cruikshank and eight other men were arrested for the attack (Lieber,
2005).
The problem that arose was that the state government refused to prosecute the men on murder charges and in the federal courts, murder was not a crime at that time. They were then charged in federal court under the Civil Rights Enforcement Act of 1870. Their crimes were interfering with the free black men’s First, Second and Fourteenth Amendments. All of the men were convicted in federal court, but appealed their conviction to the United States Supreme Court. Then on March 27, 1876 the Supreme Court lead by Chief Justice Morrison R. Waite, handed down a unanimous decision in favor of the defendants. The Supreme Court stated that the right of the people to assemble peacefully existed long before the creation of the Constitution of the United States and it was the states responsibility to afford protection under this amendment. They stated that the Second Amendment specifies that bearing of arms is for a lawful purpose. They stated that it is not a right granted by the Constitution and that the Second Amendment shall not be infringed by Congress (Lieber, 2005).
They also stated that the Second Amendments has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government. Leaving the people to look for their protection against any violation by their fellow citizens of the rights it recognizes, to what is call the "internal police." As for the Fourteenth Amendment, the court stated that every republican government and the state have the duty to protect all of its citizens in the enjoyment of this principle. It has not been shown that the alleged have violated the rights of these citizens in regards to race or color. The court also said that these counts are too vague and uncertain. That the Bill of Rights only applied as a limitation on the National government. Individuals could not file charges against other citizens in federal court and it was up to the states to protect the rights of its citizens (DeRosa, 1993).
The second case that was heard by the Supreme Court in reference to the Second Amendment was in Presser v. People of Illinois (1886). Mr. Herman Presser was part of a German American citizen militia group called the Lehr und Wehr Verein, which means Instruct and Defend Association in English. The group was associated with the Socialist Labor Party and was formed to counter the private armies of companies in Chicago. On September 24, 1879, in Chicago, Illinois, Mr. Presser and about four hundred armed men paraded on horseback through the streets of Chicago with rifles, in a show of force to the companies that hire private armies. Mr. Presser was then arrested and charged with belonging to an unauthorized militia that had no associate with the volunteer militia of Illinois or military forces of the federal government (Vernick, Teret, 1993).
Presser was then found guilty in court and sentenced to a $10 fine. Mr. Presser then felt that the state of Illinois violated his Second and fourth Amendment and proceeded to take his case to the United States Supreme Court. On Jan 4.1886 the Supreme Court lead by Justice William B. Woods handed down a unanimous decision in favor of the State of Illinois. The Supreme Court stated that the Second Amendment 's guarantee of the right to keep and bear arms only applied to the federal government. It also said that states have the power to control and regulate military bodies, including drilling and parading activities. In this case the Supreme Court reaffirmed the U.S. v. Cruikshank decision that the federal government is limited to act on the Second Amendment. The Court also stated that there is a limit on which the state can restrict firearms. They stated that the state may not disarm the people to such an extent that there may not be any remaining armed militia for the general government to call on (Vernick, Teret, 1993).
The third case the Supreme Court Heard in reference to the Second Amendment was Miller v. Texas (1894). Franklin Miller was a shop owner in Dallas, Texas, who had a live in maid that was a black woman with a light skinned daughter. Local people in town and the Dallas Police new that Miller had a live in maid and started to harass him because they believed she was his girlfriend. The police heard that Miller had a gun and people over heard Miller saying that he was going to kill the police if they come by his store. On June 18, 1892 two police officers enter Millers store and shots rang out. One police officer died on the scene and Miller was arrested for having a concealed weapon and murder. Miller was then convicted of murder and sentenced to death. After losing his appeal, he then took his case to the Supreme Court stating that his Second and Fourth Amendment rights had been violated under the Fourteenth Amendment. On May 14, 1894 the Supreme Court handed a unanimous decision in favor of upholding the Texas murder conviction. The court said that they wouldn 't even consider whether Miller 's rights had been violated under the Fourteenth Amendment because he had not filed such a claim in his original trial. Under the Texas’s Reconstruction Act of 1871, The Act prohibited anyone from carrying a concealed weapon and allowed warrantless arrest for any violations (Vernick, Teret, 1993).
The fourth case that the Supreme Court heard in regards to the Second Amendment was U.S. v. Miller (1939). Jack Miller and partner Frank Layton were well known moonshiners and were being watched by federal agents in suspicion of running an illegal distillery. On April 18, 1938 federal agents moved in on Miller and his associate in an attempt to catch them transporting moonshine across state lines and operating an illegal distillery. The agents did not find any moonshine or a functioning distillery; instead they found a shotgun that had a barrel less than eighteen inches long. Under the 1934 National Firearms Act, any shotgun that has a barrel less than eighteen inches in length is subject to a $200 tax. Of course Miller did not pay any tax on his weapon, so the agents arrested him for carrying an unlicensed sawed off shotgun across state lines which was in violation of NFA. When Miller went to trail his attorneys argued that NFA violated his Second Amendment right by interfering with his right to possess a firearm (DeRosa, 1993).
The U.S. District Court Judge of Arkansas agreed with the defense and throw out the indictment. The United States Attorney then disagreed with the District Courts decisions and appealed the case to the Supreme Court. On May 15, 1939 the Supreme Court handed down a unanimous court decision. Justice McReynolds stated that court has reversed the District Courts decision and remanded the case back to the district court. The Supreme Court stated that it cannot be said that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument, or that the statute violates such constitutional provision. However by remanding the case to the lower court, the Supreme Court was obviously unaware of the fact that shotguns were used in trench warfare in WW I. This gave the defense a chance to prove that a short barreled shotgun could contribute to the effectiveness of a well regulated militia (DeRosa, 1993).
The last case the Supreme Court heard and made a decision on in regards to the Second Amendment was Lewis v. U.S. (1980). In 1961 George Calvin Lewis, Jr. was arrested in Florida for breaking and entering. Mr. Lewis pleaded guilty in the Florida court and was to sentence prison. After completed his prison sentence he traveled to Virginia in January of 1977 and was arrested on probable cause. He was then indicted on knowingly receiving and possessing a firearm that was transported across state lines. Before going to court he waved a trial by jury and was given a bench trail. At his trial the government introduced a copy of his felony conviction in Florida. They stated that under the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, felons are forbidden to possess firearms. Lewis’s defense then informed the court that he did not have attorney in his felony conviction in Florida. Lewis’s attorneys argued that under Gideon v. Wainwright, supra, a prior conviction could not be obtained in violation of his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment. The Virginia court rejected the claim and stated that the defense could not offer any evidence that he did not have an attorney present in 1961. Lewis was then convicted and appealed his case to the Court of Appeals. The Appeals Court had a dividend vote but upheld the lower court’s ruling and rejected the notion that his Fifth and Sixth Amendments were violated. Lewis then appealed his case to the Supreme Court stating that his Fifth and Sixth Amendments were violated. Then on February 27, 1980 the Supreme Court decided to uphold the lower court’s ruling. The Supreme Court then stated that Congress intended for defendants to clear their criminal status prior to obtaining a firearm. That in turn would help keep firearms away from potentially irresponsible and dangerous individuals (United States v. Lewis, 1979).
The Supreme Court is currently hearing the case of the District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the Second Amendment is center stage in this case. On March 18, 2008 oral arguments opened up for what will be one of the most important Supreme Court cases in over 100 years. In Washington D.C. there has been a strict gun law for over 32 years and the D.C. legislators have done little to ease one of the nation’s highest crime rates. Finally Dick Anthony Heller a 65 year old man and an armed security guard put an application in with the District to keep a hand gun at his home for protection. The District rejected his application and Mr. Heller decided that he had enough of his Second Amendment being violated. The case was first heard in the federal trial court in D.C. and Heller was refused his Second Amendment rights. The court stated that the Second Amendment only applies to militias. The Case then went to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia and in a two to one vote, the Court of Appeals agreed with Mr. Heller. The three judges stated that restrictions were unconstitutional and that individuals have the right to own guns (District of Columbia v. Heller, 2008). The answer to whether the Second Amendment grants citizens of the United States the right to bear arms, lies in the history of the nation and Supreme Court rulings. From the nation’s turbulent beginnings till present day, the gun has become an American Icon. Standing for the strength of a nation, the gun has been ingrained into our American heritage. In the earliest Supreme Court rulings on the Second Amendment, Justices have stated that the Second Amendment shall not be infringed by Congress (1876), and that the state may not disarm the people to such an extent that there may not be any remaining armed militia for the general government to call on (1886). By looking at how our nation was settled, the ancestry of the framers, the simplicity of how the Second Amendment is stated and the early Supreme Court statements on the right to bear arms, it is clear as day that our forefathers intended for Americans to always have the right to bear arms.
References:
DeRosa, M. (1993) The Second Amendment and American Federalism: A View from the States. Perspectives on Political Science, Vol. 22, Issue 2, p52, 11p.
District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) Retrieved May 21, 2008, From http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2007/2007_07_290/
GunCite (2007) Retrieved May 21, 2008, From http://www.guncite.com/.
Lieber, D. (2005) The Cruikshank Redemption: The Enduring Rational for Excluding the Second Amendment for the Court’s Modern Incorporation Doctrine. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol.95, Issue 3, p1079-1125, 47p.
O’Connor, K., Sabato, L. J. (2008) American Government: Continuity and Change (9th Ed.) New York: Pearson.
Spitzer R. (2001). The Right to Bear Arms: Right and Liberties under the Law. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clio.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. United States v.George Calvin Lewis, Jr. (1979) Retrieved May 21, From http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F2/591/978/.
Vernick, J., Teret, S. (1993) Fire Arms and Health: The Right to be Armed with Accurate Information about the Second Amendment. American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 83, Issue 12, p1773-1777, 5p.
The United States of America was forged out of a raw and wild land; the main tool that was used for this forging process was the gun. Prior to the settlers arriving in the new world, North America was a land governed by Native Americans that had little law and order. When the first settlers arrived guns helped to protect them, allowed them to …show more content…
kill enough wild game to survive and to push west. As the settlers moved west, they established new territories and guns helped to establish law and order. As more settlers arrived in America to gain religious freedom and to escape the oppression of the monarchy governments; the English colonies grew in population and size.
England started to impose harsh laws on the colonies, and then in 1775 the colonist retaliated by defying the English government and seizing control of the thirteen colonial governments. The colonists then set up the Second Continental Congress and formed the Continental Army lead by George Washington. Then in 1776 the colonies declare independence from England by signing the Declaration of Independence and formally calling the new nation the United States of America. From 1775 to 1783 the Revolutionary War was fought between the United States and Britain. It was a long and bloody war that proved to be very costly for both sides. Britain won most of the major battles between the two nations but it was General Washington’s resiliency and the nation’s minutemen that out lasted the British (O’Connor, Sabatol, 2008).
In 1783 the war finally ended and England officially surrendered the colonies to the United States in the signing of the Treaty of Paris. For the first time the United States of America was recognized by the Treaty of Paris as an independent sovereign country. After the Revolutionary war ended, the usefulness of the gun continued to be a viable asset in the American way of life. With the continued expansion of the country all the way to the pacific coast, guns once again helped men tame the western frontier and bring civilization to millions of acres of wilderness. Then on September 17, 1787 the United States Constitution was adopted at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. It would then take over two years for all thirteen states in the union to ratify the United States Constitution and for it to become the law of the land (O’Connor, Sabatol, 2008).
At that time the Constitution had only ten Amendments, which was known as the Bill of Rights. Out of those ten Amendments, the one amendment that has helped shape our country and is often the topic of controversy today is the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment states that a well regulated Militia is necessary for the security of a free state and the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Since the framers of the Constitution were all primarily of English descent and mostly all of their legal ideology came from English law. It would be common knowledge to say that the second amendment gets its origins from English common law and the right to bear arms can be traced back to the times of King Henry II. During the time of King Henry II in 1181, the King required all knights and freemen to bear arms in service of him (Spitzer, 2001).
Then in 1689 England created an English Bill of Rights that gave protestant people the right to bear arms suitable for their own defense. For over two hundred years guns have helped forge the United Sates into the nation it is today and they have protected its shores from enemies foreign and domestic. Today some people argue that the America gun culture has out served its usefulness, they say that guns should remain in the past and not be part of everyday American life in the present. Other people say that they have an inherit right under the Constitution to own a gun, and that the Second Amendment was very clear in stating that the right of the people to bear arms, shall not be infringed. Even after looking at the history of how guns have evolved in the United States and the history of the framers of the Constitution. It is still partially unclear to a large number of people what exactly does the Second Amendment say. Whether someone is a gun control advocate or a pro gun advocate, both sides have interpreted the Second Amendments meaning to legitimize their agenda.
To look for legal answer on interpreting laws, Americans have traditionally looked for the courts for answers. The problem with getting a clear straight answer on the Second Amendment is that there has not been allot of court rulings on it. The United States Supreme court has ruled on the Second Amendment only five times since the ratification of the Constitution and has refused to hear one case. The cases that they have ruled on are the U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876), Presser v. Illinois (1886), Miller v. Texas (1894), U.S. v. Miller (1939), and Lewis v. U.S. (1980). The Supreme Court refused to hear the case of Burton v. Sills (1968) (GunCite, 2007)
The first Supreme Court case to involve the Second Amendment was U.S.
v. Cruikshank (1876). This case took place during the Reconstruction period of the south in Grand Parish, Louisiana. During this time there were many changes being made in the state and local government positions. In 1873 the governor of Louisiana appointed a new Judge and Sheriff for the Grand Parish, Louisiana area. White men in that area that were part of the Klu Klux Klan had threatened to burn down the local court house and take control of the government in retaliation for the governor’s action. The new sheriff and his posse that was made up of freed black man guarded the parish court house for three weeks. Then on April 13, 1873 the Klu Klux Klan with over a hundred men attacked the court house and burned it to the ground. In the aftermath of the attack over sixty black men had been killed, W.J. Cruikshank and eight other men were arrested for the attack (Lieber,
2005).
The problem that arose was that the state government refused to prosecute the men on murder charges and in the federal courts, murder was not a crime at that time. They were then charged in federal court under the Civil Rights Enforcement Act of 1870. Their crimes were interfering with the free black men’s First, Second and Fourteenth Amendments. All of the men were convicted in federal court, but appealed their conviction to the United States Supreme Court. Then on March 27, 1876 the Supreme Court lead by Chief Justice Morrison R. Waite, handed down a unanimous decision in favor of the defendants. The Supreme Court stated that the right of the people to assemble peacefully existed long before the creation of the Constitution of the United States and it was the states responsibility to afford protection under this amendment. They stated that the Second Amendment specifies that bearing of arms is for a lawful purpose. They stated that it is not a right granted by the Constitution and that the Second Amendment shall not be infringed by Congress (Lieber, 2005).
They also stated that the Second Amendments has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government. Leaving the people to look for their protection against any violation by their fellow citizens of the rights it recognizes, to what is call the "internal police." As for the Fourteenth Amendment, the court stated that every republican government and the state have the duty to protect all of its citizens in the enjoyment of this principle. It has not been shown that the alleged have violated the rights of these citizens in regards to race or color. The court also said that these counts are too vague and uncertain. That the Bill of Rights only applied as a limitation on the National government. Individuals could not file charges against other citizens in federal court and it was up to the states to protect the rights of its citizens (DeRosa, 1993).
The second case that was heard by the Supreme Court in reference to the Second Amendment was in Presser v. People of Illinois (1886). Mr. Herman Presser was part of a German American citizen militia group called the Lehr und Wehr Verein, which means Instruct and Defend Association in English. The group was associated with the Socialist Labor Party and was formed to counter the private armies of companies in Chicago. On September 24, 1879, in Chicago, Illinois, Mr. Presser and about four hundred armed men paraded on horseback through the streets of Chicago with rifles, in a show of force to the companies that hire private armies. Mr. Presser was then arrested and charged with belonging to an unauthorized militia that had no associate with the volunteer militia of Illinois or military forces of the federal government (Vernick, Teret, 1993).
Presser was then found guilty in court and sentenced to a $10 fine. Mr. Presser then felt that the state of Illinois violated his Second and fourth Amendment and proceeded to take his case to the United States Supreme Court. On Jan 4.1886 the Supreme Court lead by Justice William B. Woods handed down a unanimous decision in favor of the State of Illinois. The Supreme Court stated that the Second Amendment 's guarantee of the right to keep and bear arms only applied to the federal government. It also said that states have the power to control and regulate military bodies, including drilling and parading activities. In this case the Supreme Court reaffirmed the U.S. v. Cruikshank decision that the federal government is limited to act on the Second Amendment. The Court also stated that there is a limit on which the state can restrict firearms. They stated that the state may not disarm the people to such an extent that there may not be any remaining armed militia for the general government to call on (Vernick, Teret, 1993).
The third case the Supreme Court Heard in reference to the Second Amendment was Miller v. Texas (1894). Franklin Miller was a shop owner in Dallas, Texas, who had a live in maid that was a black woman with a light skinned daughter. Local people in town and the Dallas Police new that Miller had a live in maid and started to harass him because they believed she was his girlfriend. The police heard that Miller had a gun and people over heard Miller saying that he was going to kill the police if they come by his store. On June 18, 1892 two police officers enter Millers store and shots rang out. One police officer died on the scene and Miller was arrested for having a concealed weapon and murder. Miller was then convicted of murder and sentenced to death. After losing his appeal, he then took his case to the Supreme Court stating that his Second and Fourth Amendment rights had been violated under the Fourteenth Amendment. On May 14, 1894 the Supreme Court handed a unanimous decision in favor of upholding the Texas murder conviction. The court said that they wouldn 't even consider whether Miller 's rights had been violated under the Fourteenth Amendment because he had not filed such a claim in his original trial. Under the Texas’s Reconstruction Act of 1871, The Act prohibited anyone from carrying a concealed weapon and allowed warrantless arrest for any violations (Vernick, Teret, 1993).
The fourth case that the Supreme Court heard in regards to the Second Amendment was U.S. v. Miller (1939). Jack Miller and partner Frank Layton were well known moonshiners and were being watched by federal agents in suspicion of running an illegal distillery. On April 18, 1938 federal agents moved in on Miller and his associate in an attempt to catch them transporting moonshine across state lines and operating an illegal distillery. The agents did not find any moonshine or a functioning distillery; instead they found a shotgun that had a barrel less than eighteen inches long. Under the 1934 National Firearms Act, any shotgun that has a barrel less than eighteen inches in length is subject to a $200 tax. Of course Miller did not pay any tax on his weapon, so the agents arrested him for carrying an unlicensed sawed off shotgun across state lines which was in violation of NFA. When Miller went to trail his attorneys argued that NFA violated his Second Amendment right by interfering with his right to possess a firearm (DeRosa, 1993).
The U.S. District Court Judge of Arkansas agreed with the defense and throw out the indictment. The United States Attorney then disagreed with the District Courts decisions and appealed the case to the Supreme Court. On May 15, 1939 the Supreme Court handed down a unanimous court decision. Justice McReynolds stated that court has reversed the District Courts decision and remanded the case back to the district court. The Supreme Court stated that it cannot be said that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument, or that the statute violates such constitutional provision. However by remanding the case to the lower court, the Supreme Court was obviously unaware of the fact that shotguns were used in trench warfare in WW I. This gave the defense a chance to prove that a short barreled shotgun could contribute to the effectiveness of a well regulated militia (DeRosa, 1993).
The last case the Supreme Court heard and made a decision on in regards to the Second Amendment was Lewis v. U.S. (1980). In 1961 George Calvin Lewis, Jr. was arrested in Florida for breaking and entering. Mr. Lewis pleaded guilty in the Florida court and was to sentence prison. After completed his prison sentence he traveled to Virginia in January of 1977 and was arrested on probable cause. He was then indicted on knowingly receiving and possessing a firearm that was transported across state lines. Before going to court he waved a trial by jury and was given a bench trail. At his trial the government introduced a copy of his felony conviction in Florida. They stated that under the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, felons are forbidden to possess firearms. Lewis’s defense then informed the court that he did not have attorney in his felony conviction in Florida. Lewis’s attorneys argued that under Gideon v. Wainwright, supra, a prior conviction could not be obtained in violation of his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment. The Virginia court rejected the claim and stated that the defense could not offer any evidence that he did not have an attorney present in 1961. Lewis was then convicted and appealed his case to the Court of Appeals. The Appeals Court had a dividend vote but upheld the lower court’s ruling and rejected the notion that his Fifth and Sixth Amendments were violated. Lewis then appealed his case to the Supreme Court stating that his Fifth and Sixth Amendments were violated. Then on February 27, 1980 the Supreme Court decided to uphold the lower court’s ruling. The Supreme Court then stated that Congress intended for defendants to clear their criminal status prior to obtaining a firearm. That in turn would help keep firearms away from potentially irresponsible and dangerous individuals (United States v. Lewis, 1979).
The Supreme Court is currently hearing the case of the District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the Second Amendment is center stage in this case. On March 18, 2008 oral arguments opened up for what will be one of the most important Supreme Court cases in over 100 years. In Washington D.C. there has been a strict gun law for over 32 years and the D.C. legislators have done little to ease one of the nation’s highest crime rates. Finally Dick Anthony Heller a 65 year old man and an armed security guard put an application in with the District to keep a hand gun at his home for protection. The District rejected his application and Mr. Heller decided that he had enough of his Second Amendment being violated. The case was first heard in the federal trial court in D.C. and Heller was refused his Second Amendment rights. The court stated that the Second Amendment only applies to militias. The Case then went to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia and in a two to one vote, the Court of Appeals agreed with Mr. Heller. The three judges stated that restrictions were unconstitutional and that individuals have the right to own guns (District of Columbia v. Heller, 2008). The answer to whether the Second Amendment grants citizens of the United States the right to bear arms, lies in the history of the nation and Supreme Court rulings. From the nation’s turbulent beginnings till present day, the gun has become an American Icon. Standing for the strength of a nation, the gun has been ingrained into our American heritage. In the earliest Supreme Court rulings on the Second Amendment, Justices have stated that the Second Amendment shall not be infringed by Congress (1876), and that the state may not disarm the people to such an extent that there may not be any remaining armed militia for the general government to call on (1886). By looking at how our nation was settled, the ancestry of the framers, the simplicity of how the Second Amendment is stated and the early Supreme Court statements on the right to bear arms, it is clear as day that our forefathers intended for Americans to always have the right to bear arms.
References:
DeRosa, M. (1993) The Second Amendment and American Federalism: A View from the States. Perspectives on Political Science, Vol. 22, Issue 2, p52, 11p.
District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) Retrieved May 21, 2008, From http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2007/2007_07_290/
GunCite (2007) Retrieved May 21, 2008, From http://www.guncite.com/.
Lieber, D. (2005) The Cruikshank Redemption: The Enduring Rational for Excluding the Second Amendment for the Court’s Modern Incorporation Doctrine. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol.95, Issue 3, p1079-1125, 47p.
O’Connor, K., Sabato, L. J. (2008) American Government: Continuity and Change (9th Ed.) New York: Pearson.
Spitzer R. (2001). The Right to Bear Arms: Right and Liberties under the Law. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clio.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. United States v.George Calvin Lewis, Jr. (1979) Retrieved May 21, From http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F2/591/978/.
Vernick, J., Teret, S. (1993) Fire Arms and Health: The Right to be Armed with Accurate Information about the Second Amendment. American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 83, Issue 12, p1773-1777, 5p.