Amendment II (the Second Amendment) of the United States Constitution?s Bill of Rights declares a well-regulated militia as "being necessary to the security of a free State" and prohibits infringement of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms." The meaning of the Second Amendment is one of the most misunderstood and disputed among the entire Bill of Rights.[1][2]
One key controversy revolves around who is prohibited from infringement and why the Supreme Court has never ruled whether the Second Amendment prohibits individual States from infringing upon this right:[3] The most recent Supreme Court precedent, from 1875, is that the Second Amendment is limited to federal jurisdiction, (see United States v. Cruikshank) but some people contend that it extends to state jurisdictions.[4]
Another major point of contention is whether it protects against infringement of an individual right to personal firearms[5] or a collective State militia right:[6] most circuit court precedences favor the "collective" interpretation, but the "individual" interpretations are supported by recent court cases such as United States v. Emerson and Parker v. District of Columbia. There is also a "modified collective" view that says the right is protected for individuals to bear arms based on their needs while serving in a militia.[7]
Other points of disagreement include the meaning of the militia clause[8] and the meaning of infringement (does any regulation at all constitute infringement, and why have federal regulations been allowed.)[9][10] All federal courts have found that reasonable firearm regulation is allowable, while an outright firearm ban is currently the subject of Supreme Court review in District of Columbia v. Heller.
