There is a very well written discussion on the Second Amendment in Wikipedia. The Second Amendment states, “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.”

The Second Amendment was adopted on Dec. 15, 1791. “In United States v. Miller (1939) the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government and the states could limit any weapon types not having a reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.” This would make it a collective right, not an individual right. Then in District of Columbia v. Heller, the court held that the amendment protects “ … an individual right to possess and carry firearms.”

It seems to me for the court to conclude people have an individual right to firearms, they would have to also conclude that an association with a militia is not necessary even though the language of the Second Amendment expressly ties that right to an association with a militia and not just any militia, but a “well regulated” militia. This controversy is not over.

BRUCE HANSEN

Coeur d’Alene