How should the Second Amendment be interpreted?
A proper reading of the Second Amendment should not attempt to link each and every weapon to militia use – except to note that the grand scheme of the Amendment was to ensure that persons trained in the use of firearms would be ready for militia service. Correctly interpreted, the main clause of the Second Amendment (“the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”) defines and secures the right. The subordinate clause (“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State”) helps explain why we have the right. Thus, membership in a well-regulated militia is a sufficient but not necessary condition to the exercise of our right to keep and bear arms. If the Second Amendment truly meant what the collective-rights advocates propose, then the text would read: “the right of the States to arm their Militias, shall not be infringed.” But the Second Amendment, like the First, Fourth, Ninth and Tenth Amendments, refers explicitly to the right of “the
