Debatepedia partners with The People Speak Global Debates and the The National Debate Series: Boston (Nov. 10)
Debate Digest Nov 19th: Medical marijuana. Next Debate Digest article: Trying 9/11 terror suspects in NYC courts
Argument: Even if disarming is deemed necessary, it will be unconstitutional
From Debatepedia
[Edit]
Parent Debate
[Edit]
Supporting Evidence
- NELSON LUND, "D.C.'s Handgun Ban and the Constitutional Right to Arms: One Hard Question?", George Mason University School of Law, George Mason Law & Economics Research Paper No. 07-36 "The Second Amendment’s grammatical structure is identical,and so are the consequences. Whatever a well regulated militia may be, or even if no such thing exists, the right of the people to keep and bear arms is not to be infringed.27 What’s more, whether or not such a militia can actually contribute to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms remains unaffected. Indeed,even if it could be proved beyond all doubt that disarming the people is necessary to the security of a free state, still the right of the people to keep and bear arms would remain completely unchanged.28"
