Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens is releasing a new book in which he argues that the phrase “when serving in the militia” should be added to the Second Amendment.
The book is titled, “Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution”
The Second Amendment reads as follows: 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.
With Stevens’ proposed change: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms [when serving in the Militia] shall not be infringed.
Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens is set to release a new book in which he argues that the phrase “when serving in the militia” should be added to the Second Amendment.
The book is titled, “Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution,” and the change Stevens has in mind for the Second Amendment would alter the language so as to render it a protection of a collective right instead of an individual one.
Moreover, it would be a right that the government–at all levels–could regulate without hesitation.
Currently, 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.
Stevens’ contends that this was intended as a collective right only and that it was “limited in scope to the uses of arms related to military activity.”
According to The Washington Post, Stevens claims this was changed via the Supreme Court’s District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) decision. He says this decision suddenly introduced protections for “a civilian’s right to keep a handgun in his home for purposes of self-defense.”
Stevens says the McDonald v. Chicago (2010) decision furthered these changes by using “the due process clause of the 14th Amendment” to limit the ability of cities to ban the possession of handguns.
He says this can all be remedied by adding five words to the Second Amendment:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms [when serving in the Militia] shall not be infringed
The Constitution says “The Right Of The People To Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed”, not “The Right Of The Militia…”
We “fix” the Constitution by holding politicians, jurists, bureaucrats, military officers, and other Oath Takers accountable when they break their Oath.
Frankly, any Constitutional Republic that values liberty, rule of law, and equality before the law should make such Oath Breaking a hanging offense.
$#%&!@* him
Just retire and keep your socialist/Marxist mouth shut already!
The reference to “MILITIA” is only explanatory, suggesting WHY the amendment was included in the Bill of Rights. The more important portion was “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”!!! How could a “militia” be formed out of a bunch of unarmed, bleating sheeples?
Shoot the commie SOB
If that be true then why would Patrick Henry of stated, “The great object is that every man be armed. Every one who is able may have a gun”
Justice Breyer argued a few years ago that the 1st Amendment should be revisited to prohibit speech that would upset people in other cultures. Perhaps we should also get rid of that Freedom of Religion part. The Liberals do not like it anyway.
Shoot the fool.
we leave the constitution stand as our forefathers intended it ! you must have a great judge NOT !
You correct it by eliminating people like him for whom it was created for.