The Lahman Room in the Upper Union was home to a debate about the Second Amendment’s true meaning on Monday, March 3. MC Professors Brad Pyrah and Leonard Williams discussed opposing sides of the topic while Brad Nadborne served as the mediator.

  
The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the protection of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

  
The issue which was debated was whether the right listed in the Second Amendment is for the individual or for the collective population of the state. Pyrah believes the right to bear arms is an individual right, but Williams debated that it is a collective right.

  
Pyrah is has been at Manchester College for 13 years. He graduated from Brigham Young University with a B.S. in Accounting, and continued his education at BYU to earn a Master’s of Accounting and a Juris Doctorate. He is also a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association and an avid deer and rabbit hunter.

  
Williams has taught at Manchester for over 25 years. A professor of History and Political Science, he recently took a group of students to Iowa for the presidential caucus elections. In his spare time, he is a freelance crossword puzzle builder and has been featured in several publications, including Fort Wayne’s Journal Gazette.

  
Pyrah says that the Second Amendment is “an individual right” and is, “plain text, and in my mind, very clear.”

  
However, Williams rebuts that the Second Amendment refers to “a militia that is organized by the state.” He adds that he believes people can own firearms, but it must be in a legal context, like any private property. “The Second Amendment is primarily talking about the public defense, not an individual right,” says Williams.

  
Pyrah agreed there must be some restrictions. For example, he asks if the weapons in question are in common use and if the weapons are suitable for military use. He believes nuclear weapons, tanks, and sawed-off shotguns are examples of weapons which should not be available to the public.

  
Although the debaters had strong convictions, the debate was not volatile and they did not attack each other. In fact, the only time either mentioned the other was when Williams said we are talking about public safety, “not Daniel Boone gunning bears or Pyrah gunning bunnies.” The comment was met with laughter from the audience and even Pyrah.

  
The Supreme Court of the United States is currently debating the same issue in the case District of Columbia v. Heller. Pyrah says he believes the Supreme Court will decide that the right to bear arms is, in fact, an individual right.

  
Although he agrees, Williams says, “In that case, the Supreme Court would be wrong.”

[Back to top]