If you put yourself back in 1789, the intent and understanding of the framers and ratifiers become abundantly clear.
“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.”
The second half of the sentence was not a subject of much debate at the conventions, as the right to keep and bear arms was part of the God-given, unalienable, natural rights of defending one’s life, liberty, and property.
What WAS controversial at the time was the subject of the peacetime militia. The founders and framers intensely distrusted standing armies, as they had just defeated one. They knew their history and often made statements citing that tyranny was likely to arise when the people were disarmed.
The well-regulated (meaning well-drilled and skilled) militia was found to be vital to the security of a free state.
Who are the militia? Founder and ratifier George Mason stated: “They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.”
Look also to the Militia Acts of 1792. These Acts specified that the militia was “each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be age of 18 years, and under age of 45 years.” With the adoption of Amendments 13 and 14, the modern Militia is even more broadly representative of “the whole people.”
And the Acts specified military-grade armaments. Also, those military-grade armaments were considered so essential that they were “exempted from all suits, distresses, executions or sales for debt or for the payment of taxes.” How did that law disappear? We need it now.
What does this all mean? Well, it means that all federal firearms regulations are unconstitutional, as well as the “F” in the “ATF.” The Second Amendment negates any Commerce Clause arguments for regulation.
Now, the clever readers will point out that the Second Amendment only applies to federal laws, but not to the powers of the states through their constitutions. And yes, that is correct, maybe. Enter the “Privileges and Immunities” clause of the 14th Amendment. Under the “Incorporation Doctrine” of the 14th Amendment, its clauses are felt to supercede State laws.
Similarly, Red Flag Laws and the TAPS Act are unconstitutional in so many ways. They engage in violations of Amendments 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 14.
And what about the Supreme Court? According to Article 3, the federal courts render opinions. They do not make laws. Congress alone makes laws. However, since 1833, the Supreme Court has promulgated the falsehood of judicial superiority. Oligarchy by nine unelected officials in black robes threatens our Liberty. Justices serve only during periods of “good behavior.” Violating the Constitution is definitely not “good behavior,” and there are Congressional remedies for that problem.
Why should a totally fabricated “right” like abortion be immune from infringement, and the clearly specified second amendment rights be subject to infringement? This is conflicting logic.
I support the abundant clarity of the Second Amendment. I support the Constitution Solution. It is the sworn duty of every member of Congress to hold constitutionality over utility. Anyone who does not should immediately resign their office.