If ya want to go Justice Alito’s way?
The written text from 1791 has NOTHING about people having the right to ‘bear arms’ for their PERSONAL USE….
Actually the same Supreme Court in 1876 AND 1939 denied the 2nd Amend meant Americans had the ‘Right’ to have arms for their personal use…
The Supreme’s sitting in June 2008 decided that the text of the amendment DID grant indidvilals the ‘Right ‘ to bear arms in the Heller v. District of Columbia case…
Five High Court judges have given America the ability to launch and keep it’s Gun Culture …
The present day ‘Alito 5’ may put more guns in Americans hands by expanding gun ownership ‘Rights’…
The ‘culture’ now has lend itself to mass schootings of 4 or more people almpost every day in America…
Like in the Ukraine now….
There where citizen soliders, in militia’s.…
The nation’s High Court changed the Law….
Not the US Constitution….
The court is about to rule on if New York can limit issuing gun license’s in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen …
This would be a look at gun possion ‘Right’s’….
Kinda like another chance for 5 justices to ‘do their own thing’ making laws that Congress don’t….
This from the Washington Post’s The Fix….
But historians say that the notion that the amendment protects people’s right to have guns for self-defense is a relatively recent reading of the Constitution, born out of a conservative push in the 1980s and ’90s.
The text of the Second Amendment reads: “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.” The historical consensus is that, for most of American history, the amendment was understood to concern the use of guns in connection with militia service. The Founding Fathers were likely focused on keeping state militias from being disarmed, said Joseph Blocher, who specializes in the Second Amendment at Duke University’s law school.
“An individual’s right to use guns in self-defense is not expressly written in the Constitution,” said Reva Siegel, a law professor at Yale who has written prominent law review articles on the subject.
The interpretation that the Second Amendment extends to individuals’ rights to own guns only became mainstream in 2008, when the Supreme Court ruled in a landmark gun case, District of Columbia vs. Heller, that Americans have a constitutional right to own guns in their homes, knocking down the District’s handgun ban.
“That was the first Supreme Court decision to strike down a gun-control law in constitutional history,” Siegel said — and at the time, the court’s reading was considered broad even to a number of conservatives….
Any day now, the Supreme Court will rule on its first major gun rights case since Heller. Their ruling could expand the definition of the Second Amendment even further, by knocking down severe restrictions on carrying guns in public.
The Heller decision specifically carved out a right to have guns inside the home. In their next case, the court, with its strong conservative majority, will decide whether the Second Amendment includes the right to bear arms in public spaces. Their ruling could knock down a New York law requiring people to show “proper cause” when applying for a gun license, and it could affect laws in other states in a way that would dramatically expand gun rights again.
“We have moved to more and more radical interpretation of the Second Amendment,” Liebell said.