Very nice article. This presented a view that I had never considered. While the meaning of the amendment has never been in question to me, this might actually convince some people that have had questions on its meaning. Thanks
Good article. It may help sway those that are just ignorant of the facts. Will Rogers said that "Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects".
Of course nothing will change the minds of the Brady Bunch and their elk. The truth does not matter to people like them.
"As developed in the analysis below, we conclude that the Second Amendment secures a personal right of individuals, not a collective right that may only be invoked by a State or a quasi-collective right restricted to those persons who serve in organized militia units. Our conclusion is based on the Amendment’s text, as commonly understood at the time of its adoption and interpreted in light of other provisions of the Constitution and the Amendment’s historical antecedents. Our analysis is limited to determining whether the Amendment secures an individual, collective, or quasi-collective right. We do not consider the substance of that right, including its contours or the nature or type of governmental interests that would justify restrictions on its exercise, and nothing in this memorandum is intended to address or call into question the constitutionality, under the Second Amendment, of any particular limitations on owning, carrying, or using firearms."
You can also find more info on my Plagerization of 2A work thread. I just didn't want to post the same thing twice.:icon_wink: