Police Investigating Murder/Suicide at Annandale, VA Home Owned by Former LG Justin Fairfa...
We Don't Hate Them Enough: WaPo Wonders How Swalwell Could Have Risen So...
Boomers and Lesbians Teach What Democracy Looks Like Through Song
California Giving Free Sex Changes to Homeless Illegal Aliens
Lefty Media Has a Breakdown Amid Reports About Who DNI Tulsi Gabbard Might...
Jim Acosta Confirms That Trump Has Published Another ‘Crazy Jesus Post’
Mark Sanford Jumps Back Into Politics: Because His Legacy of Embarrassing His Kids...
Rep. Ayanna Pressley Says 'It Is a Death Sentence' to Deport Anyone to...
Shri Thanedar’s ‘Sick Burn’ on Stephen Miller Backfires BIGLY — All of X...
Trans Journalist Who Keeps Getting Mistaken for Her Trans Colleague Has a Theory
WaPo: Government Could Lose Billions by Discouraging Illegals From ‘Engaging in the Tax...
'Janky America': Michelle Obama Unhappy Again Now That a Non-Obama Is President
Karoline Leavitt Reminds WH Reporter What a Joke Is When Questioned About Trump's...
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson Passes Along Credible Reports of a 'Teen Trend' Forming
Zohran Mamdani's Straight-Up Giddy That It's 'Happy Tax Day' (Carol Roth Has a...

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