Law Professor Proposes to ‘Edit’ First & Second Amendments Due to ‘Anachronistic Focus on Arms’

The US has recently seen numerous deadly firearm incidents that have added to the controversy over the regulation of weapons. The current administration has pleaded to increase control of firearm sales and licenses, which has been met with criticism from gun rights activists and Republicans.

University of Miami School of Law professor Mary Anne Franks has offered a "redo" of the First and Second Amendments, according to her article published in the Boston Globe on Sunday.

Franks claimed that the first two amendments about rights related to freedom of speech, religion and bearing arms should be reviewed, as they "inspire religious-like fervor in many Americans" and are "deeply flawed in their respective conceptualizations."

"These two amendments are highly susceptible to being read in isolation from the Constitution as a whole and from its commitments to equality and the collective good," Franks wrote.

The professor claimed that the two amendments "tend to be interpreted in aggressively individualistic ways that ignore the reality of conflict among competing rights." As a result, according to Franks, "the most powerful members of society" benefit from the amendments at the expense of more vulnerable social groups.

The law professor proposed that both amendments should separately define "individual rights within the framework of ‘domestic tranquility' and the ‘general welfare’ set out in the Constitution’s preamble." Franks then went on to outline her own variant of the First Amendment:

"Every person has the right to freedom of expression, association, peaceful assembly, and petition of the government for redress of grievances, consistent with the rights of others to the same and subject to responsibility for abuses. All conflicts of such rights shall be resolved in accordance with the principle of equality and dignity of all persons."

The proposed amendment also says that the government should respect "the freedom of religion and the freedom from religion."

“The Second Amendment’s idiosyncratic and anachronistic focus on militias and “arms” degrades the concept of self-defense. The right to safeguard one’s life should not be conflated with or reduced to the right to use a weapon, especially a weapon that is so much more likely to inflict injury and death than to avoid it,” Franks wrote.

The concept of self-defense should be wider in the Second Amendment to include "a meaningful right to bodily autonomy" – such as on reproductive matters, according to Franks.

"All people have the right to bodily autonomy consistent with the right of other people to the same, including the right to defend themselves against unlawful force and the right of self-determination in reproductive matters. The government shall take reasonable measures to protect the health and safety of the public as a whole."

The current administration of President Joe Biden has repeatedly spoken in favor of restricting the right to bear arms as the heated debate continues amid record-breaking numbers of deadly shootings.

Biden has proposed to repeal the Act on the Protection of the Legal Trade in Arms that exempts manufacturers of firearms from any liability for harm that may be caused as a result of illegal use of their products.

He also offered to ban the sale and production of assault firearms and high-capacity stores as well as to limit the number of firearms that one person can possess.

In addition, Biden has insisted on the need to tighten background checks on all gun buyers and eliminate loopholes that allow people who should be prohibited by law from buying firearms to nevertheless acquire them.