THE US CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS

The study is based on the evaluation of the United States Constitution and its influence in the society. It shows how the policies implemented by the government are used to administer the livelihood of Americans. The amendments explained in the study are the determinants of justice that the government promises to provide to its citizens. After their proposal by the Congress and ratification by the states centuries ago, a “two-step process” for amending “the country’s frame of government.” As detailed by “Article Five of the United States Constitution,” the second and sixth amendments became part of the Bill of Rights and have influenced the criminal justice system immensely. They comprise of rights that people are entitled to and depend on for survival. A number of cases in the USA have been determined and centered on the two amendments enabling the Supreme Court to interpret their meaning and the scope in which they cover.
Introduction
An amendment is a formal change made to a contract, law or constitution. The changes established are presumed to add, remove or update treaties. In the United States amendment of policies takes place in the government occasionally. Policies are implemented more often, and at some point they require changes. From the government’s perspective, the alterations enhance efficient administration. The United States government has established some amendments to its constitution over the years. Some of them include the sixth and 2nd amendment.
The 6thamendment
The amendment was proposed in 1789 by Congress and became active after its implementation.

It is inclusive in the bill of rights in the United States that enforce rights related to the criminal trial. It functions under the Constitution of the United States in the context of the bill of rights that efficiently introduced the procedures administering criminal courts. Originally the amendment was based on the belief that justice delayed is justice refuted.
John’s (2003) study found the following: The major priority of the bill was to boost justice and fairness for all those individuals in a criminal prosecution. For a long time, it has played a significant role in enhancing fair trials and proceedings. The sixth amendment was ratified in 1791 after the United States decided to change the first ten amendments to the constitution into laws at the time. After the amendment was legally bound to the law, it has functioned from that period until now though it has experienced evolution after assessing cases related to the same. Apparently, the accused’s right to counsel is the most vital in the sixth amendment because its absence guarantees that he or she has no ability to declare any right.
In the past before the establishment of the sixth amendment, the right to counsel was only granted to those who could afford it during the trial and those who faced trial in the federal system. The poor people who were the majority in the society faced a lot of challenges. During trials, most of them got convicted because they could not afford counsel. After a while, the government decided to change the policy and implement a new one that would favor every individual in the society. People across all factions enjoyed the benefits of the changes. Whenever a defendant faces trial, if he or she cannot afford a lawyer the government is responsible for providing one.
Until mid-eighteenth century the British Empire prohibited the use of counsel during trials to defend the accused in the United States. After the American Revolutionary War, the Americans formed their government and changed the laws. In all criminal trials, the sixth amendment allows a defendant to undergo a speedy and fair trial by the jury of the state and the district where the crime was committed. The accused has a right to get informed about the cause and nature of the accusation. Additionally, the defendant is supposed to face confrontation by witnesses testifying against him or her. He or she is also expected to acquire necessary procedures for obtaining witnesses and the help of counsel for the defense. (Sellers, 1994)
Concerning the sixth amendment, the defendant is entitled to some rights that favor him or her. For instance, the accused has a right to have the case heard by an impartial jury comprising of independent individuals from the society who aspire to decide the case based only on evidence. In some situations, if the case has gone public the impartial jury should be chosen from another location.
He stated, the defendant has a right to a speedy trial, and it is considered as the most vital in the constitution. Green, 1992. The right assures that the person accused of a crime receives a fair trial. Without the right, most criminal defendants could be held indefinite under a large number of accusations. The accused have a right to acquire information about their criminal charges. They need to get informed about the cause and nature of the allegations. Additionally, it is another way of ensuring that a fair trial takes place. The defendant has a right to assistance of counsel. The amendment guarantees the accused to have a lawyer or attorney to defend him or her during prosecution. If he or she cannot afford a lawyer, the government should provide one. The accused also has a right to get confronted by opposing witnesses.
Since the sixth amendment was implemented, the criminal justice system has functioned effectively to provide justice to criminal defendants during trial. For centuries now, it has significantly influenced the way criminal justice system conducts and provides fair trials to individuals accused of a crime. It has enhanced speedy trials that are fair and appropriately organized making the system efficient in its activities.
The supreme court of the American government interpreted the significance and scope of the amendment in the Johnson v. Zerbst case. The court announced a complete rule necessitating appointing of counsel for criminal defendants who could not afford an attorney. In the case, the system declared that the right of a defendant to counsel is necessary to ensure essential human rights of life and freedom. The sixth amendment suppresses from the judicial system in criminal trials the audacity to deprive the defendant of his or her freedom unless they waive the help of counsel. During the case, the court suggested that any refusal must be the free choice of the accused.
The 2nd amendment
It is also amongst the ten amendments that were implemented into laws in the late 18th century. The second amendment was approved in December 1791 into the Constitution of the United States. The British rule influenced the amendment’s establishment into law. The British proposed the rule into law in 1689 and described it as a supplementary right because it assists the natural rights of resisting oppression, self-defense and the civic responsibility of defending the nation. Seemingly, it was ratified into power during the reign of President George Washington.
During its implementation into law, the United States had just attained independence from Great Britain, and the government was trying to administer its people independently. In the process, they required rules that could ensure law and order in the society. The 2nd amendment is a law that defends the rights of individuals to keep weapons. The criminal justice system has declared that the right belongs to people. They claim that the law is non-limited and allows the regulation of weapons.
According to Halbrook and independent institution (2008), the existence of the amendment had influence from the English Bill of rights that was established in the year 1689. The British Empire at the time believed that by giving people in society freedom to bear arms, the government was granting them the natural right to self-defense. Since the community was involved consistently in chaos, self-protection was a primary priority. Additionally, the United States had just gained independence from Great Britain, and they had to use some of the policies implemented by the colonial government to administer the society. Washington’ regime decided that the law was necessitated for the greater good and after discussion, it got established.
From the British colony’s perspective, the law was proposed for a variety of reasons. First of all possessing of weapons gave the citizens the ability to create a militia system. Through this, people in the society had an opportunity to participate in law enforcement. The weapons could be used to discourage or oppose a tyrannical government. The situation was considered to take place during the peak of a revolution through conflict in an organized society. They also claimed that the weapons were necessary to defend citizens from an invasion by colonies. The British colony also argued that the arms could be used by the people to participate in slave rebellions.
By the end of the 18th century, citizens of the United States with the consent of George Washington’s regime had the freedom to bear weapons. The amendment states that a well-organized militia being necessary for the security of a nation enhances the government to give people the freedom to own weapons. The constitution of the country limits the legislature from establishing policies that prohibit firearms.
Van Alstyne (1994) found, the 2nd amendment to a large extent affects the criminal justice system of the United States. The effect is evident especially in cases whereby the defendant claims they used a particular weapon for self-defense. To decide the case the judge and the jury has to imply policies that are not related to the 2nd amendment. Sometimes it becomes tough to determine if the accused is guilty or not guilty because the law presents complications. The law also affects the justice system concerning the procedures for handling a criminal prosecution. Sometimes it makes it hard for the judicial system to handle a criminal trial fast and more efficiently.
The cases involving weapons might take a long time, and in the process, new officials are likely to get introduced, some witnesses might die along the way among other factors. Eventually, the government decides to ignore such cases, and the victims are usually the defendants behind bars awaiting prosecution. Simply put the 2nd amendment creates an obstacle to efficient handling of cases related to the same.
Sellers (1994) discovered the law declares that a person has a right to own firearms for the purpose of self-defense. The authorities then believed that a person possessing a weapon could easily defend him or herself from aggressive people with intent to harm. The law was based on the assumption that all individuals in the society are entitled to protection from external attacks by the government, and in extreme cases, they are supposed to protect themselves.
In the District of “Columbia vs. Heller case” in 2008, “the Supreme Court undermined a federal law that prohibited civilians from the possession of firearms.” Majority claimed that the history and language of the 2nd amendment protected the natural right of people to own weapons for the purpose of self-defense and not the right of the nation to create a militia for protection from external attacks.
In conclusion, implementation of policies or changing of amendments into laws is necessary to enhance efficient administration. The government is consistently supposed to establish policies that ensure the well-being of people in society. The rules are expected to protect citizens from harm and defend them during criminal prosecutions. The perspective “is a guarantee that the criminal justice system will operate efficiently.”
References
Green, B. A. (1992). Lethal Fiction: The Meaning of” Counsel” in the Sixth Amendment.Iowa L. Rev., 78, 433.
Halbrook, S. P., & Independent Institute (Oakland, Calif.). (2008). The Founders’ Second Amendment: Origins of the right to bear arms. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee.
John, R. Vile, “Sixth Amendment,”Encyclopedia of Constitutional Amendments, Proposed Amendments, and Amending Issues, 1789-2002, 2nd. Ed.  (Santa Barbra, CA:  ABC CLIO Inc., 2003), 410.
Sellers, M. N. S. (1994). The United States Constitution. In American Republicanism (pp. 57-62). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Van Alstyne, W. (1994). The second amendment and the personal right to arms.Duke Law Journal, 43(6), 1236-1255.