Topic 3.5 Second Amendment: Right to Bear Arms

Which of the following statements is most consistent with the author’s argument in this passage?

• The Second Amendment protects a person’s right to own a gun from government infringement

• The Second Amendment does not protect a person’s right to have a weapon for self-defense

• The Second Amendment states that the government can only ban an entire class of weapons

• The Second Amendment states that the government cannot ban the sale of any weapon to any person

Answer explanation

Justice Scalia says that “the right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right,” making a handgun ban unconstitutional.

Which of the following civil liberties is protected under the Second Amendment?

• The right to own guns

• The right to freedom of speech

• The right to petition the government

• The right to trial by jury

Answer explanation

The Second Amendment gives citizens the right to bear arms, which means to own guns and other weapons.

In Supreme Court cases that consider the balance of power between the government's protection of the public and ensuring the rights of individuals as related to the Second Amendment, how has the Court usually ruled?

• The Supreme Court has usually made decisions that uphold the power of the government to interrogate suspects with limited interference

• The Supreme Court has usually made decisions that uphold the power of the government to place restrictions on firearms

• The Supreme Court has usually made decisions that uphold the right of an individual to a quick and speedy trial

• The Supreme Court has usually made decisions that uphold the right of an individual to own a gun

Answer explanation

In cases like McDonald v. Chicago (2010), the Supreme Court has usually made decisions that uphold the right of an individual to own a gun over protecting the power of the government to place restrictions on firearms.

Which of the following Supreme Court cases is most relevant to the topic of the article?

• Engel v. Vitale (1962)

• Baker v. Carr (1962)

• McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

• McDonald v. Chicago (2010)

Answer explanation

The topic of the article is the historical context of the Second Amendment. McDonald v. Chicago was a case about whether the Second Amendment is a right incorporated to the states.

The author’s main argument is that the Second Amendment

• did not extend privacy rights.

• was added to the Constitution to ensure that militias would have arms.

• should not be applied to states that do not have a militia.

• protects an individual’s right to own a gun for personal protection.

Answer explanation

The author is providing historical context for the Second Amendment to show that the amendment was primarily added for supporting militias.

Which of the following could be used as evidence to support the author’s claim?

• At the time the Constitution was written, laws in the states required able-bodied individuals to serve in militias.

• The Constitution clearly states that the Second Amendment applies only to the federal government’s ability to make gun laws.

• The United States today uses militias such as police forces to maintain domestic peace.

• The Constitution guarantees that all rights, including the Second Amendment, are incorporated to the states.

Answer explanation

The author is claiming that contemporary debates over the individual rights of gun owners lack historical context. The author’s claim that the Second Amendment was intended to protect citizens’ ability to defend their country or state in a militia can be supported by evidence that militia service was required of citizens by law.