1
Second Amendment: GUN CONTROL
Second Amendment-Gun Control: A Review of the Literature
Amy Marie Lucero
The University of Texas at El Paso
2
Second Amendment: GUN CONTROL
Abstract
Since the invention of firearms, people have used guns as a way of protection from any
harm that was directed towards any individual or themself. As time passed by the
allowance to bear arms was acceptable as a way of self-defense in case of any destructive
event. Since the year of the Constitution up until the present day many tragic occurrences
have resulted from the right of the Second Amendment. This literature review provides
information on the opinions of people who think the Second Amendment should be
improved and those who think it is irreverent to do such a thing. It also looks into the
organizations that are in charge of the gun control laws to further the understanding of the
ownership of and firearm. Along with this, are a variety of views towards this situation that
are presented through data collected by surveys, enabling for a better comprehension of
how serious or not serious this is towards the United States.
Second Amendment: GUN CONTROL
3
Second Amendment-Gun Control: A Review of the Literature
Throughout time many people have been victims of shootings in schools, at home, or
at local stores. The usage of these firearms has created much negativity towards the view of
having the privilege to bear arms. Families have lost loved ones with the various tragic
occurrences that seem to keep happening over and over again. Guns are left in the hands of
careless or mentally disordered people who find it simple to take the life of a human
being(s). In an effort to end these disastrous incidences politicians have taken it into their
hands to try and make some reasonable restrictions. With the wanting for some type of
change in the Second Amendment, has also brought the evaluation of the true meaning of
this amendment. Individuals in the United States have distinct opinions that create for
much more of a reason to look at both sides of the conflict to better understand what truly
is necessary to do to make please the nation. Hence, to fully comprehend what should be
done and who is for or against this cause the following question(s) will be answered:
1. How have tragic occurrences negatively impacted the American citizens' opinions
towards the Second Amendment and gun control?
2. If changes were to be made within the Second Amendment what organization(s)
may be opposed?
3. What arguments has this conflict caused in society to want to make such a
change?
4. How could a change in the Second Amendment affect the mentality of Americans
and their protection in the United States?
Second Amendment: GUN CONTROL
4
The literature review that follows will emphasize on these questions along with providing
information on gun control and how it may effect the Second Amendment if given the
allowance to make a change.
How have tragic occurrences negatively impacted the American citizens' opinions
towards the Second Amendment?
As mentioned before there have been many conflicts originating from the privilege
of having the right to bear arms which is stated in the Second Amendment. The Second
Amendment voices, “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” (Bolin & Denzin ,
2012). In other words, citizens of the United States of America are allowed to own a firearm
and use it as self-defense. Sadly, this is not always the case in the use of firearms in the
United States. Increasing numbers of tragic occurrences have begun to change the
viewpoint of many citizens on the Second Amendment.
One of the most common tragedies that have been seen continuously over the
course of many years is school shootings. Looking back to April 20, 1999, the Columbine
school shooting in Littleton was looked upon to many as one of the most worst school
shooting in U.S. history (Soraghan, 2000). In order to purchase a firearm, an individual has
to be the age eighteen or higher. In this case, as stated by Soraghan (2000), Dylan Klebold
and Eric Harris were not of age to purchase a firearms, so these two individuals perused in
asking Robyn Anderson, Dylan Klebold’s prom date, to buy the guns. These guns purchased
by this young lady were the precise weapons used to kill twelve students and one teacher
(Soraghan, 2000), also injuring an additional twenty-one students, and killing themselves
after everything as well. Robyn Anderson, the clueless young lady, goes on by stating, “It
Second Amendment: GUN CONTROL
5
was entirely too easy to purchase the guns, and something should be done” (Soraghan,
2000). Acknowledging her statement brought “some of the reality to the legislators
doorsteps, but it couldn’t convince them to change the law for gun shows.” Furthermore,
Governor Bill Owens, a Republican with the support of the National Rifle Association,
proposed some gun control measures (Soraghan, 2000), which had resulted in negativity.
Looking at another point of view, Democrats were appalled with the lack of remorse being
presented towards this tragic event (Soraghan, 2000). Therefore, not much was presented
at a nation as a whole for the change in the Second Amendment but Colorado did take it
into there hands to perform some kind of difference in their state so that nothing as tragic
as the Columbine shooting could happen again.
Unfortunately, violence continues to play a huge role in our nation and school
shootings seems to never stop. One current catastrophe took place in Newtown,
Connecticut on December 2012. In this shooting there were twenty-six individuals found
dead at Sandy Hook Elementary School. It being the second deadliest school shooting may
have been one of the biggest news but the news that appalled almost the whole nation was
the fact that these were not just people but kids who had been killed. Young, helpless
children killed by a heavily armed man in a small city where none of this could have been
expected (Schered, 2013). This not only brought great sadness and shock to citizens in
America but also to the father of two young daughters, President Barack Obama. After
finding our what had happened in this state, the President, decided to purse new gun
controls after the massacre of the children and staff members (Domenech, 2013). Yet again
negativity towards the Second Amendment was seen as people wanted to create a lasting
national campaign that would bring together various interest groups to win new limits on
6
Second Amendment: GUN CONTROL
firearms (Domenench, 2013). While Obama was making efforts to make this nation safer
for the people and children, the National Riffle Association (NRA) president Wayne
LaPierre, had been warning Americans of a massive Obama conspiracy to deceive voter and
hide his true intentions to destroy the Second Amendment (Domenench, 2013). Hence,
individuals who owned guns felt as if Obama was truly planning on destroying the Second
Amendment, which infers that these gun owners would most likely be against the change of
the Second Amendment. The controversy between this issue will continue until one side of
this argument begins to gain more members than the other. This will allow for either a
change or no change in gun control, which will be determined by the people of America.
If changes were to be made in the Second Amendment what organization(s)
may be opposed?
Many regulations have been tried for in the efforts to establish a better a safer
nation by changing some regulations on the Second Amendment of the Constitution. As
mentioned before there are people who are for the change of this cause and those who
simply find it irrelevant to make such a change to an amendment that has been around
since the Constitution was created. With this being the case one of the biggest
organizations that seems to be taking a hit is the National Riffle Association also known as
NRA.
In a special report in 2000 focusing on the National Riffle Association, discussed the
challenges that the National Riffle Association was receiving from the political campaign of
those advocating gun control in the United States. Stone begins by stating that the National
Riffle Association has often prevailed in political battles by relying on the grass-roots
muscle of its 3 million or so members (2000). But now the NRA is facing a “well-financed
Second Amendment: GUN CONTROL
7
gun control lobby that is willing to challenge the pro-gun organization on the legislative
and political fronts,” voices Stone (2000). With the growing numbers of gun control lobbies
it is creating difficulty the National Riffle Association to advocate what the organization
believes in. As stated by Stone (2000), gun control is making it impossible for the National
Riffle Association to take any actions by creating secretive groups that will be used for getout-the-vote efforts. In other words, these gun control organizations are going to gather as
many people as they can to try and make a change against those who are part of the progun organization.
This national journal creates a good example at presenting both sides of the
organizations that are involved in this argument. An example is brought up in the scholarly
journal against the emphasis on gun licensing. A man by the name of Rand gives an
example by rejecting that “licensing and registration of automobiles created a drop in
automobile deaths” (Stone, 2000), but that it was the creation of the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration. Hence, even if gun licensing and registration were put into
full effect with the right to bear arms this cause would still need something greater to make
such a change. In that case, the possibility of gun control organizations increasing may
result in change in the Second Amendment but until then the National Riffle Association
will continue to fight for their grounds. To prove this point, it states in the national journal
by Stone (2000), “the gun control movement’s success in the legislative arena may hinge on
the Election Day results.” All in all, this only presents yet another group of individuals that
feel a change must be taken into affect to create a nation much safer, but in every argument
there will be an opposing side.
Second Amendment: GUN CONTROL
8
What arguments has this conflict caused in society to want to make such a change?
Up until this point, there are two sides that can be clearly identified by the negative
outcome of the Second Amendment. The conflict has caused for many distinct ideas to
come into the picture of the world of politics. With these distinct ideas has come a variety
of arguments towards this clash in ideas. As stated by, Kaminer (1996), people cannot
predict which guns will be used in crimes. One suggestion towards this claim states if
people reduced the availability of guns the prices in the firearms would most likely
increasing making it harder for younger adults or criminals to have the ability to purchase
any type of gun. The argument towards this is that even if the availability of guns were to
be reduced it does not necessarily mean that the number of crimes would decrease it
would only decrease the fatalities (Kaminer, 1996). Looking at the other point of view on
the argument, if guns were reduced then the probability of a decrease in fatalities would be
high. Hence, whether the Second Amendment does change or not the arguments prove that
both sides would still result in fatalities because crimes will most likely never come to an
end. Kaminer (1996) goes on by explaining that even with the debate on firearms [people]
can’t agree on the principles that should govern restrictions on guns the main reason is
because people cannot agree on the right to owing a firearm (Kaminer, 1996). In this
article Kaminer (1996) goes on by questioning the Second Amendment and how it is
“awkwardly drafted.” This creates yet another argument on whether or not the
Constitution is clearly written for American citizens to fully comprehend its true meaning.
Supreme Court never answered the fundamental questions towards this issue, as stated by
Kaminer (1996), and with the lack of attention given towards it creates very little guidance
in the gun control debate.
Second Amendment: GUN CONTROL
9
How could a change in the Second Amendment affect American’s mentality towards
their protection in the United States?
Unlike some other countries, citizens of the United States of America have had the
privilege of owning a firearm since its enforcement in the Constitution in 1772. To many
citizens this amendment has given them a sense of control over any harm that may come
their way. In an article by Blocher (2012), the idea of the right to not keep or bear arms is
suggested. With the ability to have a weapon that can weaken a harmful event can cause
less worry amongst households and give the American people a sense of freedom in their
country. In other words, if gun control laws became arduous many American’s may begin to
feel less protected in their homes or any establishment where an individual may find it
necessary to keep a gun around. An example referring to this conflict is made in the
periodical by Blocher, stating that in the First Amendment individuals are given the right of
freedom of speech which basically means individuals have the power to make the decision
on what to say or what not to say (2012). On the other hand, the Second Amendment only
allows people to “the right to keep and bear arms,” meaning individuals have he power to
defend themselves while using a fire arm but claiming they are using the Second
Amendment; therefore, a person’s safety is yet again emphasized (Blocher, 2012).
Individuals should become more aware if there ever comes a day when the Second
Amendment is implicated and the government forbids from owing a firearm, which then
may make many people question their protection in their nation.
In a non-representative online survey conducted by Amy Lucero at the University of
Texas at El Paso, individuals of various age, cultural demographics, and social economic
were asked if they or any family member own a firearm (2013). Out of the five questions
Second Amendment: GUN CONTROL
10
asked to answer in the survey, question number two, which is shown in figure one, had the
highest difference between the answers of yes and no (Lucero, 2013). This demonstrates
the importance towards the Second Amendment. Figure one displays the results from the
given question:

Figure 1 (Lucero, 2013)
As exhibited in the pie graph, out of the thirty-two subjects that took the survey twentythree said that either they or their family members own a firearm. The remaining nine
people stated that neither they nor their parents own any type of firearm. At the rate that
this graph has presented one can predict that if more individuals had taken the survey the
responses for yes would have still been high. Again this can only be predicted, numbers of
responses could have gone either way. But with the data collected from this survey one can
clearly understand the importance behind the right to bear arms. Although one cannot
know why these individuals own a gun it can be assumed that these individuals are taking
advantage of their Second Amendment to protect themselves from anything they may
11
Second Amendment: GUN CONTROL
deem harmful. Again there can be many reasons as to why individuals prefer not to own a
gun rather than bearing one. If any changes were to be taken place with the Second
Amendment one can see from the graph that those individuals may be very concerned on
what their limitations or requirements may have to be. Gun control laws may or may not be
strictly enforced in the future but the more gun control laws that become enforced the less
meaning the Second Amendment will have.
Conclusion
As times continue to change so do the ideas of people and their beliefs. To many gun
control laws are needed to create a much safer nation and to others owning firearms will
create a much more protected and nation. The ideas of individuals may clash but in the end
the higher majority of people will win this clause. Hence, there will always be opposing
ideas in gun control laws and in many of the decisions made by the government. As debates
continue to go on in the political world individuals can do their part to fight for their
Second Amendment right by voting and voicing their opinions so that a variety of ideas can
be looked upon. All in all, gun control and the Second Amendment have a significant
amount of importance in the safety of the United States of America, so any decision made
will create a huge impact.
12
Second Amendment: GUN CONTROL
References
Blocher, J. (2012). THE RIGHT NOT TO KEEP OR BEAR ARMS. Stanford Law Review, 64(1),
1-54.
Bolin, D. J., & Denzin, B. O. (2012). When All Heller Breaks Loose: Gun Regulation
Considerations for Zoning and Planning Officials Under the New Second
Amendment. Urban Lawyer, 44(3), 677-687.
Domenech, B. (2013). The Truth About Mass Shootings and Gun Control. Commentary,
135(2), 25-29.
Kaminer, W. (1996). Second thoughts on the Second Amendment. Atlantic Monthly
(10727825), 277(3), 32.
Lucero, A. M. (2013) Gun Control Survey. March 5-April 5, 2013.
Schered, M. (2013). THE NEXT GUN FIGHT. (Cover story). Time, 181(3), 24-33.
Soraghan, M. (2000). COLORADO AFTER COLUMBINE THE GUN DEBATE. State
Legislatures, 26(6), 14.
Stone, P. H. (2000). PLENTY OF FIREPOWER. National Journal, 32(30), 2370