Druga poprawka do konstytucji USA. Próba wykładni
Abstrakt
If we were to list a few of the most controversial fragments of the United States Constitution, the Second Amendment would surely be one of them. In spite of the fact, that the Second Amendment is rather short, it abounds in phrases that are not necessarily understandable to modern-day readers. Terms such as militia, bear arms or security of a free state are literally easy to understand, yet all of them refer to some abstract ideas the meaning of which is not as clear today as it was two centuries ago. In order to explain the difficulties and variations in meaning of the Second Amendment, the author of this paper came to the conclusion that it was reasonable to attempt to properly interpret it’s content. After portraying the two renderings of the Second Amendment – the “individual right” model (also known as the standard model) and the “states’ right” model (otherwise known as the collective right model), the author performs a linguistic interpretation of the provision while also referring to it’s historical, systemic and functional aspects. Also, the paper summarises the views of supporters of both the individual right model and the collective right model. Finally, conclusions are drawn and the author attempts to answer the question of what constitutes the cause of the differences in interpretation discussed.Bibliografia
Alstyne W.V., The Second Amendment and the Personal Right to Arms, “Duke Law Journal” 1994, vol. 43.
Charles P.J., ‘Arms for Their Defence?’: An Historical, Legal, and Textual Analysis of the English Right to Have Arms and Whether the Second Amendment should Be Incorporated in McDonald v. City of Chicago, “Cleveland State Law Review” 2009, vol. 57, nr 3.
Cramer C.E., Olson J.E., What Did “Bear Arms” Mean in the Second Amendment?, “Georgetown Journal of Law & Public Policy”, 2008, vol. 6, nr 2.
Diamond R.T., Cottrol R.J., The Fifth Auxiliary Right (book review), “The Yale Law Journal” 1995, vol. 104.
Halbrook S.P., Kopel D.B., Tench Coxe and the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, 1787-1823, “William & Mary Bill of Rights” 1999, vol. 7, nr 2.
Henigan D.A., Arms, Anarchy and the Second Amendment, “26 Val. U.L. Rev.” 1991, nr 107.
Kates D.B., Handgun Prohibition and the Original Meaning of the Second Amendment, “Michigan Law Review” 1983, vol. 82, nr 204.
Kozińska A., Strzelanina w Las Vegas. Sprawca nie żyje, co najmniej 58 ofiar i około 400 rannych, 2 października 2017 r., wiadomości.wp.pl, www.wiadomosci.wp.pl/strzelanina-w-las-vegas-sprawcanie-zyje-co-najmniej-58-ofiar-i-okolo-400-rannych-6172365042210433a.
Laidler P., Konstytucja Stanów Zjednoczonych Ameryki. Przewodnik, Łódź 2007.
Morawski L., Podstawy filozofii prawa, Toruń 2014.
Morawski L., Zasady wykładni prawa, Toruń 2010.
Pułło A., Konstytucja Stanów Zjednoczonych Ameryki, Warszawa 2002.
Reynolds G.H., A Critical Guide To The Second Amendment, “62 Tennessee Law Review” 1995.
Rostenthal L., Malcolm J.L., Second Amendment Plumbing after McDonald: Exploring the Contradiction in the Second Amendment, “Legal Studies Research Paper Series”, nr 10-33.
Stowell E.T., Top Gun: The Second Amendment, Self-Defense, and Private Property Exclusion, “Regent University Law 522 Review”, vol. 26.
Strzelanina w liceum na Florydzie. Nastolatek zabił 17 osób, 15 lutego 2018., TVN24.pl, www.tvn24.pl/wiadomosci-ze-swiata,2/usa-strzelanina-w-szkole-na-florydzie,815173.html.
Wiśniewski P., Druga Poprawka do Konstytucji Stanów Zjednoczonych (Second Amendment) – fundamentalne prawo konstytucyjne, czy niebezpieczny anachronizm. Wykładnia postanowień konstytucyjnych, (w:) Broń, problematyka prawna i kryminalistyczna, Toruń 2013.
Zieliński M., Wyznaczniki reguł wykładni prawa, „Ruch prawniczy, ekonomiczny i socjologiczny” 1998, rok LX, z. 3/4.