A Well-Regulated Militia.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/is-gun-control-written-in-the-second-amendment-gary-cosby-jr/ar-AAY4FDi?cvid=2a1f5366e1ae4156ab01a0f074ed1c7c“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
To me, the second amendment could not be clearer. So long as a citizen is a member of a well-regulated Militia, the federal government will not interfere with their right to bear arms. Presumably, this does not mean a few drinking buddies declaring themselves to be a “well-regulated” Militia. Presumably it means one controlled by a Governor or a state government.
The language could not be clearer. If the real intent was to say the federal government will not interfere with any citizen bearing arms, the language was very confusing. And the writers of the Constitution and it’s first ten amendments were pretty good at writing in clear, easily understood manner.
The second amendment was never used to protect the rights of any citizen to own guns of any type, until arbitrary decisions of certain courts starting in the 1950’s. The Dred Scott decision of the 1850’s, making slavery legal throughout the United States, the 1950’s court rulings on guns, the 2021 Supreme Court overturning Roe vs. Wade, are all examples of courts just making up new law that they think would be good for the country.
Are guns necessary for citizens to maintain Democracy. As a last resort that can be used if a dictator seizes control of the country, against the wishes of the majority?
The events of January 6, 2021 lead me to believe that armed citizens are as likely to take up arms to take down democracy as they are to protect it. So, the loss of thousands each year to gun violence, which other countries do not have, does not seem to buy us anything.
