The MASS DECEPTION of the Second Amendment – Debunked
Daphne Delvaux
Founder & Owner of Delvaux Law, a Women's Rights Firm | @themamattorney | Employment Lawyer Fighting For Your Workplace Rights
Many have never read the full Second Amendment. We only hear the third part, but never the first part (underlined);
?It is a grammatically awkward sentence, doomed to cause confusion from the start.???
Historical context of the amendment:
In 1789, James Madison proposed 17 amendments, including the Second Amendment. We don’t really know what he meant by it. There is nothing about an individual’s right to a gun for self-defense or recreation in Madison’s notes.
The following 2 centuries, there were ample gun restrictions, including limiting access to guns and gunpowder. The courts upheld these restrictions. The US Supreme Court did not give individual gun rights outside of the context of the militia. “Bear arms” was interpreted by the courts in a military context.
All interpretations concluded it did not guarantee an individual right to a gun.?
Then, the NRA entered the chat.?
History of the NRA
After the Civil War, a group of officers wanted to sponsor shooting training and competitions to improve their troops’ shooting skills.??So to be clear, the NRA originated from a military context.
Ironically, the NRA initially supported banning machine guns (they were used by bank robbers). The NRA was focused on shooting skills and hunting access until the 70s. Then, as part of a larger conservative backlash aimed at distrust of the federal government, the NRA grew more powerful and political.
In 1972 the Republican platform supported gun control, including restricting handguns.
By 1980, largely influenced by Reagan’s pro-gun stance, the Republican platform opposed gun regulations. Reagan endorsed the NRA.??The NRA started funding constitutional lawyers, professors and politicians. The consensus was overturned.?
领英推荐
The GOP placed gun rights at its center and it became part of the Republican identity. The public followed course.
In 1959, 60% of Americans favored banning handguns, 24% did in 2012.
In 2008, Scalia wrote the majority decision in DC v. Heller. This was the FIRST time the Supreme Court ruled the Second Amendment guaranteed an individual’s right to own a gun. In a 5-4 ruling, the unfettered gun right was introduced for the very first time. All 5 Justices were nominated by NRA-backed Presidents.??
The case was about DC’s law banning handguns without a trigger lock. Scalia decided “self-defense” was implied in the Constitution, completely omitting and ignoring the EXPLICIT language about the "well-regulated militia".?
To date, we rarely hear anyone mention the “well-regulated militia”, which is how the amendment STARTS.
“A FRAUD of the American public” is how former Chief Justice Warren Burger described the interpretation of the Second Amendment. Burger was a conservative Justice appointed by Nixon. He said the real purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure state armies would be maintained for the defense of the state, not to give citizens an unfettered right to ANY kind of weapon.?
Reminder: the Founders were not infallible gods. Their words are not sacred. Madison was a slaveowner. He did not want women or BIPOC to have any constitutional rights. He has also been dead for 200 years.?
Why do we keep bowing to the words of a slaveowner at the expense of our children's lives?
We can AMEND the amendment. Clue's in the name!
The Constitution is not a masterpiece. We must accept the Constitution, and the drafters, as flawed, and correct it when we know better. The Second Amendment, when it comes down to it, is just garbage grammatical language. No one can dispute that. It needs a software update. We should not worship documents when they lead to preventable deaths.?
The Constitution HAS been changed before. If we keep resisting changing the Constitution, we will forever be locked into the America intended by the Founders: white patriarchy.
Like Thomas Jefferson said:
If we ARE to stay close to the “original intent” of the Constitution, we must interpret “arms” as existed in 1789. You cannot pick and choose. Bring back the muskets and nothing else. The Constitution, on its face, just does not protect the right to keep and bear assault rifles.?
Source of historical context: The Second Amendment, a Biography, by Michael Waldman, President of Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law
Sommelier at Large
1 年You are a pathetic ignoramus Fraud, but I'm sure lots of ignorant americans will accept your confused, misplaced & FALSE interpretation of the Oldest Enumerated Right in the Constitution. Embarrassing to those of use actually informed on the subject.
Executive Leadership, Talent, Learning, Sales & Strategy
2 年Do you have any articles that cover “separation of church and state”
General Manager at Punt Road Wines and Napoleone Cider
2 年This is fantastic reading and feels so overlooked in the debate. Context is everthing!
Mechanical Engineer at Lam Research
2 年Can you provide some sources? I thought your underlines were all links.