Gun Control & RKBA

Of course the article is wrong several times - Federalist 29 explains what HAMILTON WANTED the militia to be - NOT what it was in actuality, or in law.

It was NOT a select militia more in tune with the National Guard today. It was all able bodied males of certain ages - barring certain and specific exemptions (none of which I am sure would be thrilled to know they had no right to arms - just cause they aren't in a militia - ha try telling dueling Hamilton he or Burr had no right to arms cause they were in the govt!).

Since "most" citizens within reason are in the militia these days, and as the article explains the prime purpose of the 2nd is to keep the government from dis-arming the militia...tough call, huh?

That is what happens when congress usurped power to change the definition of "militia"...what was otherwise a well defined and well understood entity in 1789 - inclusive of entities that had existed for decades, and were codified as such numerous times, including the very clear-languaged Militia Acts of 1792. Not saying it wasn't warranted - our militias sucked as fighting forces for their original purpose - upholding the guarantees made in the constiitution, protecting our liberties, enforcing the laws, repeal invaders, etc..

Maybe when Congress changed the definition of "militia" to a more select, more federal entity, they should have changed the amendment....they didn't.