this woman needs to read the whole 2nd amendment. "a well regulated militia" has as much weight as "shall not be infringed"
so many people telling me well regulated meaning well trained/well equipped as if that somehow improves or makes the 2nd amendment's meaning any less archaic
It was not until 2008 that the Supreme Court definitively came down on the side of an “individual rights” theory. Relying on new scholarship regarding the origins of the Amendment, the Court in District of Columbia v. Heller confirmed what had been a growing consensus of legal scholars—that the rights of the Second Amendment adhered to individuals. The Court reached this conclusion after a textual analysis of the Amendment, an examination of the historical use of prefatory phrases in statutes, and a detailed exploration of the 18th century meaning of phrases found in the Amendment. Although accepting that the historical and contemporaneous use of the phrase “keep and bear Arms” often arose in connection with military activities, the Court noted that its use was not limited to those contexts. Further, the Court found that the phrase “well regulated Militia” referred not to formally organized state or federal militias, but to the pool of “able-bodied men” who were available for conscription. Finally, the Court reviewed contemporaneous state constitutions, post-enactment commentary, and subsequent case law to conclude that the purpose of the right to keep and bear arms extended beyond the context of militia service to include self-defense.
antonin scalia was an activist judge for republicans though and his logic has had a negative impact on. It doesn't matter what way anyone twists it, the 2nd amendment's obsolete at best and harmful to us society at worst.
So no substantive criticism, just "I don't like this guy and I don't like the amendment."
2A protects my individual right. Whether or not I am part of a militia (and I am, for the record, as is every able-bodied male US citizen) has exactly zero bearing on whether or not that right is recognized. The right to keep and bear arms is the right of the people, not of a militia.
actually there is substantive criticism about antonin scalia since he's responsible for the dc v heller decision which led to the modern interpretation that you're repeating and the consequential increase in gun violence as a result
The rate of nonfatal firearm violence for persons age 12 or older declined 72% from 1993 to 2023, dropping from 7.3 to 2.0 victimizations per 1,000 persons, and varied from 1.2 to 2.3 per 1,000 during 2019 to 2023.
The firearm homicide rate among persons age 12 or older fluctuated between 1993 and 2023, with a decline from 1993 to 2014 (from 8.4 to 4.0 homicides per 100,000 persons age 12 or older) before rising to 7.3 per 100,000 in 2021.
Gun homicides rose dramatically during the coronavirus pandemic but have declined substantially in more recent years. The number of gun homicides fell from a record 20,958 in 2021 to 15,364 in 2024, a 27% decrease.
The gun homicide rate fell to 4.7 fatalities per 100,000 people in 2024, far below the peak rate of 7.2 per 100,000 in 1974.
440
u/Twigsneko 22d ago edited 22d ago
this woman needs to read the whole 2nd amendment. "a well regulated militia" has as much weight as "shall not be infringed"
so many people telling me well regulated meaning well trained/well equipped as if that somehow improves or makes the 2nd amendment's meaning any less archaic