re: #169 The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge

Yeah, but this is bullshit. “Arms” that are “necessary” for the “security of a Free State” today might very well include ICBMs with MIRVed warheads. Anyone think the 2nd Amendment authorizes personal ownership of them? Well then, it has nothing to do with personal ownership of anything.

The second says that a well regulated militia is necessary, not arms. It says that the existence of a free state is predicated on the right to bear arms. It makes no claims as to absolutes, and a strict reading can easily limit it to such arms as can be born, distinguishing then from ordinance.

Anyway, the point is that the Court has moved steadily away from caring about authorial intent, which is the only reasonable way to move forward as a society. We can argue that this causes negative impacts in certain cases, as I definitely would with the ubiquity of modern gun violence, but that’s another issue.