I see there’s a lot of thought here, but it’d be easier for potential readers if you separated you summarization of the amendment in a single post seperate from the rest.No- they fully intended for the populace have access to arms- but they also fully recognized that the government had to have the ability to regulate the USE of those arms. If for no other reason than to prevent armed groups from trying to overthrow lawful government.
A militia is nothing more than an armed citizenry, acting under the ORDERS of lawful government.
It is not and never has been any group independent from government. It differs from an Army by the fact that militia are not PAID- nor are they supplied by the government- but are comprised of citizens willing and able to act in defense of their communities if and when called upon by lawful authority. The founders were talking about what they used to call the Minutemen.
However- the interpretation that the only clause that counts is the "Congress shall make no law" is not supported by MOST of US History nor by most historical precedent.
By every rational interpretation, there is NO law preventing citizens from owning a CAR... and yet not everyone is allowed to USE a car whenever and wherever they please.
The State rightly imposes certain restrictions based upon the safety of Other citizens.
Requiring a license reflecting training- or a registration- are NOT preventing anyone from bearing arms. Its simply stating what constitutes responsible ownership.
The POINT of what you characterize as political commentary you apparently missed. It was to point out that the Gun lobby and the Gun nuts have perverted the 2nd amendment into some notion that Government of the people ITSELF can not be trusted... and that this distrust has recently manifested in the Gun fetishists in this country overwhelmingly supporting Trump- who- by every metric- is an absolute authoritarian and potential tyrant in the making.
They openly discuss the notion of using "2nd amendment remedies" if necessary to enforce a fascist leader in training.
This is an example of how far off the rails the Gun lovers in this country have run in being propagandized by a gun manufacturers lobby group trying to distort the meaning and purpose or the 2nd amendment.
The founding fathers absolutely foresaw the rise of someone like Trump- and the possibility that the ruling party might not choose to curb the excesses of a president of their own party.
The internal enemy the gun owners OUGHT to be up in arms against is any politician, or any party, that is not expressly following the constitution.
If the Democrats were stealing supreme court nominations, or turning a blind eye to emoluments and foreign despots meddling in elections then they would be the party undermining the rule of the people.
but the gun nuts aren't on the side of the constitution. nor of government by the people.
They see lawful government AS the enemy... and in this sense they have become the enemy of lawful governance.
For this reason alone- it is time to amend the 2nd amendment to correct for the pernicious influence of social media and hundred million dollar campaigns to dis-inform and pervert the citizen's understanding of real patriotism.
Its not a aide bar to the topic presented- its the manifestation of WHY the regulation clause HAS to be enforced and the private interests curbed in their ability to manipulate both congress and the media.
It seems you’re saying that the amendment was intended to apply to all citizens but under government regulation. Which actually isn’t mich different from my interpretation.
Any amendment is obviously subject to certain restrictions. The first amendment has many caveats, so why wouldn’t the second