The Second Amendment of the United States 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.” From these lines, we get the controversial issue of private gun ownership rights.
This Amendment causes the most discourse among the original Bill of Rights laws. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court affirmed for the first time that the right to own guns belongs to individuals for self-defense in the home. When we think of the Second Amendment, this idea of an individual constitutional right to own guns is the first one that usually pops into one’s mind. What about the well-regulated militia part? Has there always been an emphasis on an individual rights to own guns?
The American political scientist Robert Spitzer wrote that every law journal article discussing the Second Amendment through 1959 “reflected the Second Amendment affects citizens only in connection with citizen service in a government organized and regulated militia.” Only beginning in 1960 did law journal articles begin to advocate an “individualist” view of gun ownership rights. What changed? The power and influence of the gun lobby, more specifically the National Rifle Association (NRA). When there is a sudden change in legal interpretation or a zoomed in focus on some obscure issue, you can thank special interest groups. A fine example of this is the sudden focus on Critical Race Theory before the 2021 election cycle.
Former Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren E. Burger wrote in 1990:
“The Constitution of the United States, in its Second Amendment, guarantees a “right of the people to keep and bear arms.” However, the meaning of this clause cannot be understood except by looking to the purpose, the setting and the objectives of the draftsmen… People of that day were apprehensive about the new “monster” national government presented to them, and this helps explain the language and purpose of the Second Amendment.”
Burger later added: “If I were writing the Bill of Rights now, there wouldn’t be any such thing as the Second Amendment… that a well regulated militia being necessary for the defense of the state, the peoples’ rights to bear arms. This has been the subject of one the greatest pieces of fraud – I repeat the word ‘fraud’ – on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime.”
When the U.S. government wanted to pass the Brady Bill in 1992, a bill that established background checks before purchasing guns, an opinion piece by six former American attorneys general, stated:
“For more than 200 years, the federal courts have unanimously determined that the Second Amendment concerns only the arming of the people in service to an organized state militia; it does not guarantee immediate access to guns for private purposes. The nation can no longer afford to let the gun lobby’s distortion of the Constitution cripple every reasonable attempt to implement an effective national policy toward guns and crime.”
There are even more probable dark and sinister reasons the Founding Fathers never intended for the Second Amendment to guarantee individual rights to own guns, that’s racism and slavery.
At the time the Bill of Rights was crafted, slavery was alive and kicking. The Haitian Slave Revolution was taking place and there was fear in the southern states that similar rebellions could happen in the U.S.
Patrick Henry argued at the Virginia Constitution Ratifying Convention of 1788, that the Constitution could keep states from suppressing a slave insurrection without Congressional approval. James Madison went back and revised the Second Amendment and tied in the militia part to ease these fears.
In 1776, Thomas Jefferson submitted a draft Constitution for Virginia that stated “no freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms within his own lands or tenements.” This draft was rejected. Why would this version be rejected if the intent of the Second Amendment was for people to own and operate guns? If Jefferson’s version would have become the Second Amendment, it would have guaranteed free black men the right to own and operate guns, an outcome that was not desired by the southern states at that time.
Today in the U.S. we’re afflicted with mass shooting after mass shooting. We receive a lot of poorly thought out alternative fixes, exquisite speeches and hallow promises from politicians about the need to change gun laws, with no follow through or change on the matter. Why? The NRA is too powerful. If a Republican even whispers that he/she wants to change gun laws, the NRA will run a well-funded opponent against them and beat them in a primary. Some Democrats hail from conservative areas or states and have to play nice with the NRA or risk facing the financial wrath of the NRA in an election against them, so they can’t vote for changes to the gun laws. The American public is left with the status quo, thoughts and prayers, but no changes.
There are a lot of historians that believe the other side that the Founding Fathers absolutely meant individual gun rights when the Second Amendment was written. This is the stance Anthony Scalia took in the majority opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller. The truth of the matter is we really don’t know the Founding Fathers intent behind the Second Amendment.
They fed us this endless stream of propaganda that individual gun rights was always the intent behind the Second Amendment. In fact, the militia part is not even mentioned anymore. What we can say for sure is that American public knowledge and understanding of the Second Amendment remains heavily swayed by the powerful NRA propaganda machine. It’s not crazy to think that not only is our whole understanding of the Second Amendment wrong, but that it may not even be what the Founding Fathers intended when they drafted it.
