Exploration Lesson

Should We Have the Right to Bear Arms? – Personal Decision Sheet

Directions: For this exercise, one must assume the following conditions are actual

For this lesson, you are to consider the beliefs that four individuals have about

interpreting the 2nd Amendment and its relation to law and order. The beliefs of the four individuals may be expressed below:

Citizen 1: Mrs. Rainey: "All guns should be banned completely. People should not take the law into their own hands. The elected officials, government offices, and the police force should offer us complete protection. There is no need for anyone to own a gun. The order should be maintained, and the laws should be upheld by those paid to do it. When the amendments were made, it was a different time than now. People had to own guns to protect themselves because there was no government agency or police force to offer protection."

Citizen 2: Mr. Hofstraw: "I believe in gun control. There should be tougher rules for getting a gun and more background checks when a person buys a gun. They should have to wait a long time before they are allowed to receive the gun after purchasing it. There should be a limit on the number of firearms a person can purchase in one year. There is too much violence, with people shooting each other. Those who seek order should leave it up to the officials in charge to protect us and our property and only use their guns when the circumstances are dire, and the citizens cannot wait on police assistance. The 2nd Amendment was written so people could own a gun if necessary if the authorities could not offer them the protection they needed, but it should only be used as a last resort."

Citizen 3: Mrs. Richards: "I believe that citizens should have the right to own a firearm; it is a right our Constitution offers. I believe that order can only be maintained when people protect what is rightfully their property. With the growing number of people owning firearms, the leaders could not offer us all the protection we need. People should be able to protect themselves if necessary and only be punishable under the law if they do something that is not considered legal with firearm use. They could not just arbitrarily shoot another person; they must protect what belongs to them. The 2nd Amendment offers us protection and the right to bear arms, so it should be accepted if we use it to protect ourselves."

Citizen 4: Mr. Walker: "All citizens should own a gun. People would not be so quick to break the law if they knew everyone had a gun and could protect themselves, and order would be maintained. Not allowing people to own firearms infringes on each individual's law-abiding citizens' rights. Firearm control measures would be unnecessary if our current lawmakers enforce the laws. I am an advocate for every citizen's guaranteed right to own firearms. The 2nd Amendment guarantees this right, and we should not question it."

Directions: After evaluating the above beliefs regarding the 2nd Amendment, please answer the following questions.

1. In your own words, what is the position taken by each of these four people?

2. Concerning the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, how does Mrs. Rainey's position differ from that of Mr. Walker?

3. Concerning the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, how does Mr. Hofstraw's position differ from that of Mrs. Richards?

4. Which of the four positions matches your own beliefs?

5. Which of the four positions is most likely that law and order intended by the Amendment will be maintained?

6. Which of the four positions is most likely what our forefathers intended when amending the Constitution?

7. Which of the four positions is most likely the thinking most officials have today, many years after the Constitution was amended?

8. Who do you think would be a supporter of the National Rifle Association?

9. What is your position on gun control versus gun rights?

10. Do you think legislative documents such as the Brady Handgun Prevention Act were ever thought of when the Constitution was amended? If so, why or why not?

Should We Have the Right to Bear Arms? – Group Decision Sheet

Directions: For this exercise, one must assume the following conditions are actual

For this lesson, you are to consider the beliefs that four individuals have about

interpreting the 2nd Amendment and its relation to law and order. The beliefs of the four individuals may be expressed below:

Citizen 1: Mrs. Rainey: "All guns should be banned completely. People should not take the law into their own hands. The elected officials, government offices, and the police force should offer us complete protection. There is no need for anyone to own a gun. The order should be maintained, and the laws should be upheld by those paid to do it. When the amendments were made, it was a different time than now. People had to own guns to protect themselves because there was no government agency or police force to offer protection."

Citizen 2: Mr. Hofstraw: "I believe in gun control. There should be tougher rules for getting a gun and more background checks when a person buys a gun. They should have to wait a long time before they are allowed to receive the gun after purchasing it. There should be a limit on the number of firearms a person can purchase in one year. There is too much violence, with people shooting each other. Those who seek order should leave it up to the officials in charge to protect us and our property and only use their guns when the circumstances are dire, and the citizens cannot wait on police assistance. The 2nd Amendment was written so people could own a gun if necessary if the authorities could not offer them the protection they needed, but it should only be used as a last resort."

Citizen 3: Mrs. Richards: "I believe that citizens should have the right to own a firearm; it is a right our Constitution offers. I believe that order can only be maintained when people protect what is rightfully their property. With the growing number of people owning firearms, the leaders could not offer us all the protection we need. People should be able to protect themselves if necessary and only be punishable under the law if they do something that is not considered legal with firearm use. They could not just arbitrarily shoot another person; they must protect what belongs to them. The 2nd Amendment offers us protection and the right to bear arms, so it should be accepted if we use it to protect ourselves."

Citizen 4: Mr. Walker: "All citizens should own a gun. People would not be so quick to break the law if they knew everyone had a gun and could protect themselves, and order would be maintained. Not allowing people to own firearms infringes on each individual's law-abiding citizens' rights. Firearm control measures would be unnecessary if our current lawmakers enforce the laws. I am an advocate for every citizen's guaranteed right to own firearms. The 2nd Amendment guarantees this right, and we should not question it."

Directions: After evaluating the above beliefs regarding the 2nd Amendment, as a group, please answer the following questions.

1. In the group’s words, what is the position taken by each of these four people?

2. Concerning the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, how does Mrs. Rainey's position differ from that of Mr. Walker?

3. Concerning the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, how does Mr. Hofstraw's position differ from that of Mrs. Richards?

4. Which of the four positions matches the group’s beliefs?

5. Which of the four positions is most likely that law and order intended by the Amendment will be maintained?

6. Which of the four positions is most likely what our forefathers intended when amending the Constitution?

7. Which of the four positions is most likely the thinking most officials have today, many years after the Constitution was amended?

8. Who does the group believe would be a supporter of the National Rifle Association?

9. What is the group’s position on gun control versus gun rights?

10. Does the group believe legislative documents such as the Brady Handgun Prevention Act were ever thought of when the Constitution was amended? If so, why or why not?