Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1946885
 


 



The Right Not to Keep or Bear Arms


Joseph Blocher


Duke University - School of Law

January 1, 2012

Stanford Law Review, Vol. 64, pg.1, 2012

Abstract:     
Sometimes a constitutional right to do a particular thing is accompanied by a right not to do that thing. The First Amendment, for example, guarantees both the right to speak and the right not to speak. This Article asks whether the Second Amendment should likewise be read to encompass both the right to keep or bear arms for self-defense and the inverse right to protect oneself by avoiding them, and what practical implications, if any, the latter right would have. The Article concludes - albeit with some important qualifications - that a right not to keep or bear arms is implied by what the Supreme Court has called the “core” and “central component” of the Second Amendment: self-defense, especially in the home. Recognizing such a right might call into question the constitutionality of the growing number of “antigun control” laws that make it difficult or illegal for private individuals to avoid having guns in their actual or constructive possession.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 54

Keywords: Second Amendment, First Amendment, Heller v. District of Columbia

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: October 21, 2011 ; Last revised: April 5, 2012

Suggested Citation

Blocher, Joseph, The Right Not to Keep or Bear Arms (January 1, 2012). Stanford Law Review, Vol. 64, pg.1, 2012. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1946885

Contact Information

Joseph Blocher (Contact Author)
Duke University - School of Law ( email )
Box 90360
Duke School of Law
Durham, NC 27708
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 999
Downloads: 189
Download Rank: 92,561

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.203 seconds