Anonymous #1 1d

Actually it was intended to codify the protection of all possession and lawful use of arms, but the courts wanted to keep this away from minorities up until Heller

0

Anonymous #1 1d

Hunting and warfare may not seem directly connected nowadays, but they very much were in the days that the founders wrote this on paper, and self defense was protected independently.

1

Anonymous OP 1d

Interesting and I see that interpretation of it, but the first part does mention the states being able to form a militia it was so they didn’t need a national Army. I wanted to be clear I do also agree with your interpretation, especially in the reading of the last part of the amendment

1

Anonymous #1 1d

In all fairness that necessity is only in a free state :(

8

Anonymous #1 1d

But the official US interpretation of the militia is that it is fulfilled by state national guards

1

Anonymous OP 1d

Yes, they quite literally are a state militia

1

Anonymous #1 1d

Well yes but I think the idea is more so the democratization of the force structure than the literal ability of the state entity to gather bodies and arms for a militia. The state would do so regardless of whatever they write on paper, the only reason for them to write it down is to ensure the ability of their citizens to do so against the state entity's will.

1