The interpretation of the Second Amendment has changed drastically since 1791. The 2nd Amendment has frequently been interpreted to imply that only militias have a right to bear arms. Additionally, it has been said that militias are collective in nature (such as the Army National Guard) and thus are distinctly different than individuals. Good sources for help in interpretation of this seemingly complex amendment (27 words and 3 commas) are always available: for example, the actual co-author of the Second Amendment, George Mason, once said, “I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” Mahatma Gandhi agreed, arguing that, “Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.” Let’s ask Penn and Teller what they think of those that interpret the Second Amendment to not be an individual right…
Second Amendment to the U.S. Bill of RightsA 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.
Top Posts & Pages