Questions: Read the following excerpt from the Supreme Court decision in the Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller. Explain how the Supreme Court interprets the Second Amendment as it relates to personal liberties and the government's need to pass laws protecting the safety of society. "Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

Read the following excerpt from the Supreme Court decision in the Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller. Explain how the Supreme Court interprets the Second Amendment as it relates to personal liberties and the government's need to pass laws protecting the safety of society.
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

Transcript text: Read the following excerpt from the Supreme Court decision in the Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller. Explain how the Supreme Court interprets the Second Amendment as it relates to personal liberties and the government's need to pass laws protecting the safety of society. "Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

Solution

Answer

The answer is: The Supreme Court argued that government has the right to pass laws restricting the possession of firearms when that possession may lead to a danger to society.

Explanation

Option 1: The Supreme Court argued that previous court decisions restricting personal ownership of firearms should be vacated.

This option is incorrect. The Supreme Court did not suggest that all previous restrictions should be vacated. Instead, it acknowledged that certain restrictions, such as prohibitions on concealed weapons and possession by felons, are consistent with the Second Amendment.

Option 2: The Supreme Court argued that society safety concerns always outweigh the need for the personal right to carry a firearm.

This option is incorrect. The Court did not state that safety concerns always outweigh personal rights. Instead, it recognized that the right to bear arms is not unlimited and that certain regulations are permissible.

Option 3: The Supreme Court argued that government has the right to pass laws restricting the possession of firearms when that possession may lead to a danger to society.

This option is correct. The Court acknowledged that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited and that the government can impose restrictions, such as prohibiting firearms in sensitive places or by certain individuals, to protect public safety.

Option 4: The Supreme Court argued that the importance of personal liberty to possess a weapon far outreaches concern over safety.

This option is incorrect. While the Court affirmed the individual right to possess firearms, it did not suggest that this right outweighs all safety concerns. Instead, it recognized the legitimacy of certain restrictions to ensure public safety.

Was this solution helpful?

Unhelpful

Helpful

Questions asked by other users

Next >

Thank you for your feedback.

Copied!