NARRATOR 1: A well-regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. 

NARRATOR 2: Few parts of the Constitution are more frequently debated than the Second Amendment. The different understandings over where to draw the line between the right to bear arms and gun control sit at the center of numerous political disputes in the United States. 

NARRATOR 1: So what are the origins of this amendment, and how has it been interpreted throughout American history? This is the story of the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment, like other elements of American law, can trace its origins to English law. The right to carry arms or weapons to defend oneself and participate in the defense of the community has a long tradition. In the Middle Ages, for example, some laws required male landowners to have weapons and serve in their parent’s militia. Provisions like these established in the law a citizen's traditional right to protect themselves, their liberty, and their community.

NARRATOR 2: However, over time, the government began to place broad limits on the right to bear arms. For example, in the English Bill of Rights in 1689, gun ownership was protected for Protestants, but denied to Catholics, reflecting the religious tensions of the time. 

NARRATOR 1: Despite these restrictions, the idea that an individual had a right to defend themselves and their liberty remained strong. In 1765, William Blackstone, the famous chronicler of English law, wrote that the right to bear arms was “indeed a public allowance under due restrictions of the natural right of resistance and self-preservation.” When the sanctions of society and laws are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression. 

NARRATOR 2: Eleven years later, as the American colonies fought for their independence from Great Britain, the right to bear arms became dear to the colonists who formed armed militias or organizations of nonprofessional soldiers to resist British rule.

As states began to write new constitutions, many explicitly included a right to bear arms and established militias. They asserted this not only to protect their rights to personal protection but also to defend liberty, combat government overreach, and resist British tyranny.

NARRATOR 1: In 1789, when debates over what to include in a Bill of Rights for the new national government began, one of the first proposals submitted by James Madison to Congress included this same guarantee. The text of the Second Amendment was ratified, and, along with the nine other amendments of the Bill of Rights, became part of the Constitution in 1791.

NARRATOR 2: Though the right to bear arms was enshrined in the Constitution, it was not seen as unlimited. Questions concerning how to best interpret its protections and reasonable limitations have been numerous and hotly contested. 

NARRATOR 1: These issues often focus on the construction of the amendment's language, and whether it ought to be interpreted as an individual's right, or only in connection with the term militia. Other cases have raised the issue as to whether the amendment protects the right to possess all types of weapons, or whether there are rational limits, and if there are limits, what are they? 

NARRATOR 2: The Supreme Court heard very few cases involving the Second Amendment in the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries. In 2008, however, the case of District of Columbia v. Heller reached the High Court. The central question of this case was whether an individual has a right to possess weapons for self-defense. 

NARRATOR 1: Citing the first clause of the Second Amendment, the District of Columbia argued that the strict restrictions placed on gun ownership were reasonable, as people only had a right to weapons in connection to militia service, and that banning some weapons was reasonable to prevent crime.

NARRATOR 2: Heller's team argued that the restrictions implemented by the district were denying the client's right to self-defense in his home. 

NARRATOR 1: In a 5 to 4 decision, the court found in favor of Heller. The court concluded that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to possess and carry weapons.

NARRATOR 2: The issue was taken up again in the 2010 case of McDonald v. Chicago, and another 5 to 4 decision. The court incorporated the right of an individual to keep and bear arms, expanding the Second Amendment to apply to state governments as well as the federal government.

NARRATOR 1: One thing is clear. Debates about the limits and interpretation of the Second Amendment will continue. How do you think the court will interpret the extent and limits of the right to bear arms? This has been the story of the Second Amendment.