Legal Question in Constitutional Law in Minnesota

In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the right to bear arms under the 2nd Amendment was an individual right that prevents not only the federal government but states from infringing on that right. Since it sounds like you are looking for a scholarly article, go straight to the source: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf

Hope that helps.

I find it wonderful that you enjoy studying. You sound like someone receptive to learning and open to changing your views upon new knowledge.

Here is a link to a provocative law review article published in January 2012 entitled "The Right Not to Keep or Bear Arms�: http://www.stanfordlawreview.org/sites/default/files/articles/Blocher-64-Stan-L-Rev-1_0.pdf

Also, here is a link to an interesting article regarding pacifism and the Second Amendment: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1028682

Enjoy your studies.

And, here is a link to an article about Australia�s experiences with gun control: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/opinion/australia-banned-assault-weapons-america-can-too.html?src=me&ref=general&_r=0

I agree that the amendment was written to support militias when we had no standing military, but there are reasonable arguments that its purpose was broader. Even if that was the amendment's primary purpose, it is at least plausible that the *method* which the Founders chose to support the militias was by creating an individual right to gun ownership.