CHRISTMAS AND NEW YEAR VIP SALE Our Gift to You This Holiday Season
Nicholas Kristof Says Congolese Girls Suffer Because of Careless Men in DC
Our Gift to You This Holiday Season
Department of Interior Pulling the Plug on Five Wind Farms, Citing National Security...
Mass Deportation Won't Rip Families Apart—Illegals Chose to Break the Law, Now They...
Young Girl in Minnesota Says They Should Not Be Illegal Because We're on...
Congresswoman Is Appalled That Trump and Vance Can't Stop With the Openly Racist...
Brian Stelter Pretty Jazzed That Canadian TV Channel Has Posted That 60 Minutes...
DOJ Sues DC Metropolitan Police Department for Infringement on Second Amendment Rights
Palmeri Claims Blowing Up Terrorist Boats Damages Trump's Legacy More Than Biden's Afghani...
Harmeet K. Dhillon Suing Minneapolis Public Schools for Anti-White Discrimination
'PEAK IRONY!' Joe Biden's Preemptively Pardoned Son Slams Connected Elites Who Avoid Conse...
There’s More to the Story of Four Masked Federal Agents Tacking a Man...
NPR's Hilarious Memo Ends Professor Carl Tobias's Reign as Rent-a-Quote King After 77...
Ezra Klein and the NYT Ask a VERY Stupid Question; Twitter Obliges Them...
'This Is Amazing': Rep. Jasmine Crockett Says the Right Fears Her Authenticity (Roll...

WaPo analysis takes a closer look at 'how the Second Amendment was reinterpreted to protect individual rights'

Last week, the Washington Post’s Marc Fisher reminded us that the AR-15 was “invented for Nazi infantrymen” in the late 1950s, many years after the end of World War II.

Advertisement

So, given their apparently very tenuous grasp of relatively recent history, it should come as no surprise that WaPo staff writer Amber Phillips would get 18th-century American history so spectacularly wrong:

Of course this would be considered an “analysis” at the Washington Post:

But historians say that the notion that the amendment protects people’s right to have guns for self-defense is a relatively recent reading of the Constitution, born out of a conservative push in the 1980s and ’90s. (Twitchy editor’s note: “Historians say.” Gotta love it when they bust that one out!)
The text of the Second Amendment 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.” The historical consensus is that, for most of American history, the amendment was understood to concern the use of guns in connection with militia service. The Founding Fathers were likely focused on keeping state militias from being disarmed, said Joseph Blocher, who specializes in the Second Amendment at Duke University’s law school.
“An individual’s right to use guns in self-defense is not expressly written in the Constitution,” said Reva Siegel, a law professor at Yale who has written prominent law review articles on the subject.
The interpretation that the Second Amendment extends to individuals’ rights to own guns only became mainstream in 2008, when the Supreme Court ruled in a landmark gun case, District of Columbia vs. Heller, that Americans have a constitutional right to own guns in their homes, knocking down the District’s handgun ban.
Advertisement

K.

Amazing in that it’s so deliciously predictable. You can set your watch by this stuff.

It’s, like, right there in the Second Amendment, Amber.

About as clear as it gets.

And just so fantastically on-brand.

Advertisement

That’s probably pretty accurate as to how journalism goes down at WaPo.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement