SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS

I believe in the rights afforded by the Second Amendment. However, I disagree with the Supreme Court decision. This belief does not generate the conflict one might think it would generate. SCOTUS wrongly read the word written in the Constitution. Not only did it wrongly read it read it grossly interpreted it. They read the amendment in light of modern culture and not the glaring political reality of 13 near sovereign states in 1791. Although, we do not think in terms of hunter-gatherer societies that is nearly what it was on great expanses of wilderness the forming states. The people needed arms to protect themselves in the dance of death with the Native Americans they were displacing in addition relying on hunting as a way of life. A major factor was that each State felt the need to protect themselves from their neighbors, which they did not fully trust. Chauvinism was not different in the near independent States than it is today in the United States—we want to be independent and are ready to fight to protect our independence. If it takes guns to do all of these things, then we should have the “right to bear arms” but it doesn't.   

Amendment II [1791]

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 big lie: Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. in 2010 wrote, "It is clear that the Framers . . . counted the right to keep and bear arms among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty."

How thing have changed? The patriots would protect their states; still it would not have been individual guns against guns.  Even the most superficial treatment of the situation would call for militia against militia. After all, the just went through seven years of war with 13 united militias fighting against a British army to gain the right to form a government. Looking at all of this makes me wonder, how the SCOTUS could possible interpret the second amendment to mean that the only qualifying parameter for gun ownership is to be a citizen of the United States and define ‘gun’ as a any weapon of any description sufficient to protect the sovereignty of their State from the United States Army, Marines, and Navy.  Justice Alito wrote the Court’s opinion, which is no more than baseless right wing rhetoric. We should not consider it a settled issue as most of my fellow Americans seem to do. As a direct result of the courts ruling, our system of ordered liberty of being distorted; gun violence has created disorder. If we are to feel safe in our homes and on our streets, we must overturn the ruling.