"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Those words make up the Second Amendment of the Constitution. Those are the words our country's founding fathers wrote when the United States of America was just getting started back in 1787. Yet, some people believe we should no longer abide by this law that was laid out for us so many years ago. Can we, as a country, afford to ignore something so important that lawmakers more than 225 years ago found it necessary to include as part of our nation's law?
             The Brady Center is one group that believes we should limit and regulate gun laws. The Brady Center is the most visible group that is in favor of more federal regulations and restrictions, along with its affiliate organization, the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence (Adams 1). The Brady Center argues that the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution does not guarantee individuals the right to own and carry guns. The National Rifle Association, the most visible group against more federal regulations, responds to the Brady Center's claim by saying that the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution does indeed guarantee individual rights to own and carry guns. Both sides use the United States v. Miller case as a key point for their argument (Adams 1). In this case, the Supreme Court was asked whether the Second Amendment protected Miller's right not to register a sawed off shotgun, despite a federal law requiring it. The Supreme Court examined the original records of Congress to determine why the Second Amendment was written into the Constitution. The Supreme Court went on to clarify the intent of the Second Amendment with the following statement:
             "The Constitution, as originally adopted, granted to the Congress power -- To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws ...