Oakwood Faculty Member discusses Second Amendment of the Constitution (973 hits)
On January 22, 2013, Assistant Professor Anne Smith-Winbush, of the Department of History and Political Science, was interviewed by David Kumbroch of WHNT News 19 as part of a series focusing on the United States Constitution.
During the interview, Dr. Winbush discussed the flexibility of the Constitution as a legal document. When questioned concerning the recent controversy surrounding the Second Amendment, in light of the tragedies in Aurora, Colorado, and Newtown, Connecticut, Dr. Winbush brought attention to the actual wording of the Amendment:
"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."
Dr. Winbush contended that "A well regulated Militia" implies a level of organization such as would exist in our modern day police, or National Guard. According to Winbush, these forces are designated the task of maintaining security. Furthermore, she maintained that it is no longer necessary for all civilians to be armed.
Winbush stressed that because the Constitution was designed to be a flexible document, there are no absolutes when it comes to interpreting it.
"For example, in the Supreme Court Case of Schenck v. United States (1919), Charles Schenck's conviction on violating the Espionage Act of 1917 was upheld despite the defendant's claim of exercising free speech under the protection of the First Amendment. The unanimous opinion, written by Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., stated that Schenck's criticism of the draft (while the U.S. was embroiled in the First World War) was not protected under the Amendment, because such opposition posed a 'clear and present danger' to the wellbeing of the nation," she explained.
In other words, as citizens we do not have an absolute right to free speech, particularly if our speech poses a threat to others, she continued. "For example, it is prohibited to yell 'Fire!' in a crowded theater."
Dr. Winbush answered questions concerning the Constitutional ramifications of prayer in schools, as well as the cases of Marbury v. Madison and Plessey v. Ferguson.
REGGIE, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU A QUESTION, HAVE YOU SEEN ANYONE ABLE TO APPLY THE 2ND AMENDMENT OF OUR SOCIETY IN AMERICA IN 2013?
THEN I AOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU IF YOU HAVE EVER SEEN ANY ONE ASK AS I CONTINUE TO DO..."IS PAYER IN SCHOOL ABOUT PUTTING PAYER INTO PUBLIC SCHOOLS OR KEEPING PRAYER OUT OF SCHOOL?... AND THANKS BECAUSE NOW I SHALL POST A RE: TO YOUR BLOG. AS YOUR BLOG IS A GREAT TEACING MOMENT. (SMILE)
Thursday, April 10th 2014 at 6:47PM
ROBINSON IRMA
