General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: National Review says it is impossible to end routine gun massacres, given 2nd amendment [View all]moondust
(19,958 posts)Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 03:01 PM - Edit history (1)
The Second Amendment is so ambiguous that it can be interpreted to mean whatever anybody wants it to mean. Does it apply to individual citizens or only to a militia or both?
I suspect it may have been intended to guarantee a militia for the common defense, but a lot of semi-literate Americans didn't (and still don't) understand dependent clauses so the parts about a militia and a free state were lost. Here's the straightforward/easy part that everybody can understand so that's the interpretation that gained wide acceptance:
"the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
And so we have a gun culture that many/most Americans consider a "normal" way of life, and it's not likely to change much until 2A is repealed or rewritten for disambiguation.
And if Republicans had their way in rewriting it, they would very likely make it even worse with more gun guarantees leading to even more carnage.