so you think you know the second amendment?
For more than a hundred years, the answer was clear -- the courts had found that the first part, the militia clause, trumped the second part, the bear arms clause. In other words, according to the Supreme Court, and the lower courts as well, the amendment conferred on state militias a right to bear armsbut did not give individuals a right to own or carry a weapon.
Until around 1977 ...
Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.newyorker.com.
Since: May 08
#1 Dec 23, 2012
I did not realize how much the interpretation had changed.
Since: Sep 10
#2 Dec 23, 2012
Why would "armed militia" ever refer to anything but national defense?
#3 Dec 23, 2012
It seems so clear that the second amendment is out of date and irrelevant to modern circumstances.(Similarly: the UK monarchy, unelected members of an upper house, segregated 'faith' schools and an established state church). Perhaps what our democracies lack is a truly living and responsive constitution.
Maybe the function of an upper house ought to be to change the constitution as and when required? Currently, systems can seem self-perpetuating and too slow to change with the times.
#4 Dec 26, 2012
Apart from the fondness of theists for using firearms on those whose theology differs from theirs, what does the Second Amendment have to do with atheism?
Add your comments below
|Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09)||3 min||It aint necessari...||24,805|
|The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10)||21 min||IB DaMann||5,808|
|Quotes from Famous Freethinkers (Aug '12)||40 min||Hedonist Heretic||1,666|
|"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12)||43 min||IB DaMann||52,034|
|Fox Friends Outraged Over Atheists 'Making Chri...||1 hr||NOM s Waffle House||206|
|Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14)||2 hr||_Susan_||22,140|
|Louisiana Christians reclaim safe space by runn...||3 hr||thetruth||158|
Find what you want!
Search Atheism Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC