The Militia Acts of 1792 and 1795 clarified what the 2nd Amendment means.

[ClarendonDem]

72. I'm completely on board with the notion that there's room for further regulation of firearms

I've been following DU since the early 2000s, and the gun control discussions (IMO) often focus on the wrong issues. As a history buff, the arguments about the founders' intent regarding the 2d Amendment are interesting, as well as the discussions about the quirky wording. But what the drafters intended, or the meaning of "well regulated" or "the people" or whether the 2d covers only muskets is largely irrelevant to what laws can be passed, as is whether Scalia was right in Heller.

All kinds of firearm restrictions are permitted under the 2d Amendment and Heller, regardless of what that idiot Wayne LaPierre claims. Congress could enact universal background checks or training requirements, or even an assault weapons ban, tomorrow and those laws would be constitutional. So instead of arguing about whether we should repeal the 2d Amendment, or replace Thomas with a justice who will overturn Heller, Democrats should focus their efforts (and money, because the NRA certainly spends a lot of money), on electing representatives who will work to pass such laws.

Unless of course people want to ban firearms completely, but most folks on here insist that isn't their goal.