Quantcast

Senate Web Page, WRONG on 2nd Amendment

gun_rally_sign_AP

A Senate.gov web page (see it here) covering the Constitution gets the scope of the Second Amendment wrong, telling readers that it is not clear whether the amendment protects an individual right or a collective right.
Here is what the Senate’s web page on the Constitution says about the Second Amendment: “Whether this provision protects the individual’s right to own firearms or whether it deals only with the collective right of the people to arm and maintain a militia has long been debated.”
This is simply not true on at least two levels.
Number one, the scope of the Second Amendment has not been seriously questioned until Alisky-minded radicals isolated it from among the other amendments in the Bill of Rights and began attacking it. Before that it was taken for granted that the scope of the Second Amendment was the same as the scope of the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and so on.
Remember, the Bill of Rights protects individual, “unalienable rights” with which we were “endowed” by our Creator.
Secondly, and confirming these things, the Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment is an individual right twice in the last five years.
In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) they ruled: “The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia.” In McDonald v. Chicago (2010) Associate Justice Samuel Alito referenced the Heller decision to make the same point in a different but equally clear manner: “In Heller, we held that individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right.”
How is that Wikipedia has incorporated the Supreme Court’s 2008 ruling that the Second Amendment protects an individual right but a U.S. Senate website has not?

Read more at Breitbart.com

Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.
  • Roger

    Thank you Jan for making this known!

  • P. Shirley

    This is likely because the radical “academics” within this govt and those associated with it don’t know George Mason’s view of what the “militia” consisted of.

    I ask, Who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.
    Virginia Ratification Convention June 16, 1788

  • Chris Fostel

    I believe the Supreme Court decided this issue back in 1934, declaring that the Second Amendment was indeed intended to be an indiviual right to bear arms; not a ‘collective’ right. The Senate should study up on Court decisions before dropping misinformation on its official web pages. There was no National Guard in 1788 and according to the Federalist Papers, ‘well regulated’ in 1788 meant ‘well armed’ in today’s lingo.