How the NRA Rewrote the 2nd Amendment -- The Founders never intended to create unregulated guns

[jimmy the one]

46. 1939 Miller decision makes your claims invalid

marvin gardens: ... just because an article of our Constitution was not interpreted in the past to protect an individual right, does not mean that it is illegitimate to interpret it that way now.
Is this changing interpretation of rights political? Yes, yes it is. The Constitution is ultimately a political document

Altering the construction of an amendment to fit modern thought is indeed invalid when the reinterpretation is based on revisionist history of the constitution, a distortion of original intent, & a contradiction of stare decisis thru over 2 centuries -- INVALID.
Were scalia & his supreme goon squad to have argued that under current modernity americans have a right to keep & bear arms based on 21st century popular belief, that would have been hard to argue against, but they didn't; scalia claimed that 2nd amendment had all along been intended to protect an individual right.

In 1939 the supreme court previously 'last' ruled on the 2ndA prior to 2008 heller/mcdonald, a unanimous 8-0 ruling in 1939 (1 recusal since new arrival) and offered these interpretations & opinions:

1939 supreme court Miller decision: UNANIMOUS DECISION FOR UNITED STATES The purpose of the Second Amendment was to maintain effective state militias; Congress could require registration of a 12-gauge sawed-off shotgun if carried across state lines
The Supreme Court reversed the district court, holding that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual the right to keep and bear a sawed-off double-barrel shotgun. Writing for the unanimous Court, Justice James Clark McReynolds reasoned that because possessing a sawed-off double barrel shotgun does not have a reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, the Second Amendment does not protect the possession of such an instrument.
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/307us174
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=207511

1939 Miller: The Constitution, as originally adopted, granted to the Congress power -- "To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress."
With obvious purpose to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of such {militia] forces, the declaration and guarantee of the Second Amendment were made. It must be interpreted and applied with that end in view.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/307/174/case.html

This 1939 supreme court ruling on miller was UNANIMOUS. Not one justice felt the above wording to be wrong or misleading about any individual rkba, they clearly called it for the militia interpretation. Not one justice thought 'whoa fellow justices, look how we worded that, future generations are gonna think we're ruling for a militia interp' Nope, all thought it was proper wording.
.. Note also, the 9th recused justice later wrote a book or paper supporting gun control.

Tack on amicus brief citing adams by justice dept in 1938 to the 1939 supreme court re miller: In the only other case in which the provisions of the National Firearms Act have been assailed as being in violation of the Second Amendment, the contention was summarily rejected as follows:
The second amendment to the Constitution, providing, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed," has no application to this act. The Constitution does not grant the privilege to racketeers and desperadoes to carry weapons of the character dealt with in the act. It refers to the militia, a protective force of government; to the collective body and not individual rights. http://www.guncite.com/miller-brief.htm
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=207435