Should The United States Follow The Second Amendment Of The Constitution?

709 Words3 Pages
The second Amendment of the Constitution reads: “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." By my understanding reading the second Amendment of the Constitution the United States is not following the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution by not making every male and female over 18 who has not commit a crime or has been treated for mental illness by law. Be trained in the use and care of and own not only firearms but other modern weapons of war as well i.e. not just guns but missiles, hand grenades and trained in hand to hand fighting. The founding fathers believed this to be a matter of necessary to national security. At the time of the 2nd amendment was written there was no standing army and they believed Great Britain would invade again. Which they did in 1812 and history it has been pointed out that the militia was ineffective in carrying out the war because they were not “A well regulated Militia.” Meaning they were not organized, trained or funded in any way by the government they were slow to responaed to the call of war.…show more content…
If there was a real militia in place and we also would not have such a such a large part of the United States overweight and out of shape if every able body person in the country had to serve in the national Militia. Citizenship should be earned not be a birthright. This would also instill a renew since of pride in being a citation of the United States and just maybe the average citation would get to know his neighbor better and the gun range instead of living beside people for years and never speaking or caring about each

More about Should The United States Follow The Second Amendment Of The Constitution?

Open Document