The Second Amendment was never written to support armed rebe

[jdege]

https://www.timberjay.com/stories/gun-myths-and-legends,20545
Gun myths and legends
The Second Amendment was never written to support armed rebellion

Is an extremist myth keeping U.S. policymakers from agreeing on reasonable gun safety measures that could help to reduce the seemingly endless bloodletting in America?

That was the proposition laid out by U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin during a standing room-only presentation last week in Ely.

Raskin, who taught constitutional law for 25 years prior to his election to Congress, was challenging what’s known as the “insurrectionist theory” of the Second Amendment, a view which Raskin describes as National Rifle Association “dogma.” According to Raskin, it’s a view that has consistently undermined efforts to protect the public from high-powered weaponry in the hands of extremists or the mentally ill, despite the overwhelming public support for common sense laws such as mandatory background checks and red flag provisions.

[daleamn]

Hurumph!
Well. There's this quote from the article too.

For most of the nation’s history, the Supreme Court has held that the rights conferred by the Second Amendment were within the confines of a militia, and that it did not confer an individual right to gun ownership. That changed in 2008, when a conservative-dominated Supreme Court found for the first time in District of Columbia v. Heller that the amendment did include an individual right to gun ownership for lawful purposes, such as self-protection within one’s home.

I disagree.
(And I think there's writings of the Founding Fathers to dispute the above quote. Also just plain common sense reading ability.)

[Holland&Holland]

So? If they want to take it, they can try.

[Lumpy]

I'm a complete amateur and I could cite half a dozen references that flatly contradict Raskin's assertion.

[samginko]

It's already been debunked over and over.

Correspondence between founding fathers are well established, what they were mostly concerned with was keeping the new government.

They were talking about things like arms being illegal for commoners in Europe and only royal upper crust gets to have private armies (which was a thing back than.)

Idea was to give average citizens ability and rights of High born Europeans.

It amazes me how something so clearly written can be interpreted in so many ways.

After all when they said "militia" they meant regulars. Right?

[Jackpine Savage]

Raskin takes his place alongside Hank 'Will Guam capsize?' Johnson.