Of the many arguments that the 2nd means that there is a right to bear arms by the people, over and above the benefit to a militia is this: the wording prohibits an infringement of an already existing right. It does not create a right, it recognizes a pre-exist one - and prohibits actions against it.
It would not have been news to anyone that the people were had the right to bear arms.
Contemporaries had recently won the Revolution with weapons of their own. They knew the right existed. That's the presupposition. The reason for the Amendment was to safeguard - not create.
Seems like there is a false premise to many of the arguments against the 2nd.
It would not have been news to anyone that the people were had the right to bear arms.
Contemporaries had recently won the Revolution with weapons of their own. They knew the right existed. That's the presupposition. The reason for the Amendment was to safeguard - not create.
Seems like there is a false premise to many of the arguments against the 2nd.