The NRA’s lobbying transformed the militia-based Second Amendment into an individual gun right

Evidence

The Second Amendment had always been interpreted to mean that individuals can own guns to answer the call as a civilian militia to defend their country. In a controversial split decision across ideological lines, the Supreme Court granted gun rights to individuals independent of militia service ( District of Columbia v. Heller, 2008). Professor Michael Waldman (2014) of the New York University School of Law has traced the political machinations, spearheaded by the NRA, that turned the Second Amendment permitting citizens to bear arms for the militia defense of a free state into a private right of self-defense. Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that gun ownership is constitutionally protected, court battles are being fought to determine the limits of the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment is ambiguously crafted and mentions only militias. In its narrow ruling, the Supreme Court affirmed a constitutional individual right to keep handguns in one’s home for self-defense and hunting. This ruling, involving federal jurisdiction in the District of Columbia, left many issues unresolved. It ruled on only half of the amendment, the gun ownership part, but not on the ambiguous “bear arms” portion. — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 1180

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the essay ‘On Sacrifice’ theme of institutional reinterpretation, and to moral disengagement framing throughout this book.