@article{ref1,
title="The Second Amendment rights of children",
journal="Iowa law review",
year="2004",
author="Federle, K. H.",
volume="89",
number="2",
pages="609-669",
abstract="Strategies to reduce gun violence among juveniles generally call for   greater regulation of the design, manufacture, and registration of   firearms, and legislative bans on the possession of certain types of   weapons. But because of considerable uncertainty about the meaning of   the Second Amendment and the constraints it may place on state action,   Congress has been reluctant to enact any significant gun control   legislation. Despite the various claims of individual and collective   right theorists and scholars, we do not know what the Second Amendment   means. The text of the Second Amendment itself is remarkably   unenlightening, while textual interpretation ultimately proves   unpersuasive because of the absence of any definitive historical   understanding of the meaning of the Second Amendment or the intent of   the Framers. While there is considerable debate about what the Supreme   Court has said on the subject, no definitive Supreme Court case exists   concerning the meaning and scope of the Second Amendment.   However, a nonoriginalist interpretive framework suggests that the   Second Amendment guarantees an individual right, not because the Framers   thought so or the text says so, but because our evolving Constitution   can recognize the long tradition of lawful gun ownership in this   country. It is that nonoriginalist commitment to tolerance and liberty   which may not only provide the Second Amendment with content but   illustrates that nonoriginalism may serve interests across the political   spectrum.<p />",
language="",
issn="0021-0552",
doi="",
url="http://dx.doi.org/"
}