The Constitutional Amendments

All You Need to Now About these two amendments

Amendment 1

What is the 1st Amendment?

Amendment 1 states the freedom of speech, the press, religion, and assembly. Even though the people have freedom of speech and press, there are limits. People can not defame other people. Defamation consists of libel and slander. This means that you can not say anything that could physically hurt someone or something that is not true.

Freedom of Speech

Explanation

Freedom of speech is the freedom to say anything you want, but there are limits. People can not defame other people. Defamation consists of libel and slander. This means that you can not say anything that could physically hurt someone or something that is not true

History

The history behind freedom of speech is that the British did not allow the people to speak freely. If they talked bad about the king, they could get punished for their actions

Court Case Example

A Marine facing dismissal for running a Facebook page criticizing the Obama administration is backed now by a team of lawyers and federal congressmen as he fights to stay in the military and test its age-old policy of limiting the free speech of service members.


The 26-year-old Marine has been rallying for support since he was notified last month that the military was moving to discharge him after determining he was in violation of the Pentagon's policy, which states that service members can not get evolved with political affairs. The Pentagon was trying to get rid of the marine's freedom of speech. Is this


Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/apr/5/marine-argue-free-speech-case-hearing/#ixzz2Hxap6Qz0

Opinion

I fully support the freedom of speech because without this freedom, we would not be able to express are own ideas.

Freedom of Religion

Explanation

Having the freedom of religion means that people can practice any religion they want, and they should not be punished for doing so. If we don't have a freedom of religion, something like the Holocaust could happen once again.

History

The reason that we have freedom of religion is because the British monarchy at the time did not support the freedom of religion. That is one of the reasons why the pilgrims left England and came to Plymouth rock. Another reason is that during the Colonial times, England did not allow Massachussets to express freedom of religion.

Court Case Examples

In early 2012, a group of Muslims wanted to build an Islamic mosque named Park51, which would be built near Ground Zero, which is the site of the 9/11 tragedy. Many people said that it would be offensive to the parted ones because the Muslims planned the bombing and the hijacking of the planes. The Muslims said that they should be able to build their mosque because many Muslims were killed as well. After the legal arguement, Mayor Bloomberg, the Mayor of New York City, decided that since everyone has the freedom of religion, he said that it was fine that they build the mosque.

Opinion

I believe that everyone should have the freedom of religion. I believe that we should tolerate other people's religion or the Holocaust could happen again, and that is unacceptable.

Park51

This is an artist's rendition of what the mosque is going to look like after it is done.

Freedom of the Press

Explanation

Freedom of the press is much like freedom of speech. It allows newspapers to print whatever they want, but libel and slander still apply.

History

Freedom of press laws were first passed in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in 1539. The framers adopted the idea and put the laws in the Bill of Rights.

Court Case Example

A middle school student drew a picture of the Confederate flag in his math class. School officials learned of the drawing and suspended the student for violating its racial harassment and intimidation policy. That policy provided that "students shall not at school, on school property or at school activities wear or have in their possession any written material . . . that is racially divisive or creates ill-will or hatred." The student sued, claiming that the school officials violated his First Amendment rights.


Issue:

Whether school officials violated the student's First Amendment rights when they suspended him for violating a racial harassment policy for drawing a picture of the Confederate flag.


The court ruled that it was not a violation of the students First Amendment rights because the drawing of the Confederate Flag could cause a disruption in school activities and other students.

Opinion

I support freedom of the press because it allows people to express themselves and not have to censor it.

Freedom of Assembly

Explanation

The freedom of assembly means that people can come together, but not for any harmful cause. They can come together to discuss what they feel, but they can't rally 500 people and tell them to start burning the city.

History

During the Revolutionary War, the Sons of Liberty, which were a group of patriots, came together to plan on ideas to get the colonists to help them with their cause. The British were not happy with this, so they kept trying to look for them and stop them from achieving their goal.

Court Case Examples

Cox v. Louisiana (1965)
Rev. B. Elton Cox was arrested and convicted for breach of the peace in Baton Rouge, La., for leading a demonstation of 2,000 black college students from the state capitol to the courthouse to protest the jailing of 23 other students for attempting to integrate white lunch counters. The high court overturned his conviction, 7-to-2, and held the state's breach of the peace law overly broad.

opinion

I believe that people have the right to assemble for whatever cause, as long as it does not harm another person or group of people

Amendment 2

Explanation

The 2nd Amendment states that people have the right to bear arms.

History

During the colonial times, men needed to protect themselves in case the British soldiers just decided to attack, so that is why the Framers of the Constitution decided to add this amendment.

Court Case Example

In Heller, the Supreme Court struck down the District of Columbia’s ban on handgun possession, concluding that the Second Amendment “guarantee[s] the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.” However, the Court stated that the Second Amendment only protects the right to own certain weapons, and that it “does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns.” The Court also concluded that the “historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons’” limits the right to keep and carry arms.


Heller did not specify the types of weapons that qualify as “dangerous and unusual,” but the Court stated that it would be “startling” for the Second Amendment to protect machine guns. Since Heller was decided, every circuit court to address the issue has held that there is no Second Amendment right to possess a machine gun.

We agree with the reasoning of our sister circuits that machine guns are “dangerous and unusual weapons” that are not protected by the Second Amendment. An object is “dangerous” when it is “likely to cause serious bodily harm.” Congress defines “machine gun” as “any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.” The machine gun was first widely used during World War I, where it “demonstrated its murderously effective firepower over and over again.” A modern machine gun can fire more than 1,000 rounds per minute, allowing a shooter to kill dozens of people within a matter of seconds. Short of bombs, missiles, and biochemical agents, we can conceive of few weapons that are more dangerous than machine guns."


Mr. Heller is saying that there is no 2nd Amendment right that says that someone can have a machine gun. This is some information about the argument.

Opinion

I believe that only people with a gun licence and has a psychological check every 6 months, then they should be able to hold guns. Honestly, I believe that all guns should be banned, because why would someone need a gun. I realize it is for protection, but there are many other forms of protection other than using a gun. The government must also make the same tests when someone wants to buy a gun, because we can't have people who have mental problems be running around with any type of gun.

Author Information

Rodrigo Torrejon