The Rule of Law and the Gun Control Debate

Abstract

This paper examines the intersection of constitutional principles and public policy within the gun control debate through the lens of the rule of law. By analyzing the foundational elements of the rule of law—publicly promulgated laws, equal enforcement, independent adjudication, and consistency with human rights principles—this research establishes a framework for evaluating Second Amendment jurisprudence. The study traces the evolution of gun rights through landmark Supreme Court decisions, including District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), which collectively establish an individual right to bear arms while acknowledging certain regulatory boundaries. The research explores how democratic participation shapes firearms legislation through electoral engagement, lobbying efforts, public advocacy, and legal challenges. By examining competing perspectives on gun regulation without advocating for specific policies, this paper illuminates the complex balance between constitutional rights and public safety concerns, demonstrating how the rule of law provides a structured framework for addressing one of America's most polarizing debates.

Keywords: Second Amendment, gun control, rule of law, constitutional rights, Supreme Court, democratic participation

DOI: 10.7176/JLPG/149-05

Publication date: August 28^th 2025