Scott Jennings Tells Kasie Hunt That CNN Has Everything Backwards About Minnesota’s ICE...
Neighborly Violence: MN Official Says Illegal Alien Who Attacked ICE Agent Is a...
Feeling BAAAAAD? Minneapolis Official Invites Stressed Staff to ‘Healing Circle’ With ‘The...
How People Magazine Treated Timothy Busfield's Sexual Abuse Claim Versus Scott Adams' Obit...
Department of War Intends to De-Woke Stars & Stripes
New York Times Reporter Gets Nothing From Kurt Schlichter but Contempt
Man Who Stole Rifle From FBI Vehicle During Minneapolis Rioting Arrested
'I HOPE I'm Wrong'! Tom Homan Warns Walz & Frey What Might Be...
Minnesota State Representative Posting the Locations of Federal Law Enforcement Officers
Frey's Defiance: Wants Police to Battle ICE – Trump Must Invoke the Insurrection...
Alienation of Affection: Kyrsten Sinema Accused of Affair Amid U2, Taylor Swift, and...
Blinded 'Dare to Struggle' Member Who Rushed Cops Says Doctors Say It's a...
Star Trek Is Now Even Worse Than When Stacey Abrams Guest-Starred as President...
Gov. Tim Walz Assures Us Minnesota Will Remain an 'Island of Decency'
While Walz & Frey Call Protesters 'Protecting Neighbors,' DHS Reveals Criminal Illegals Am...

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