Home page Random article About FAQ Contact us Donate
Contribute
New article Recent changes Chopping block Developers
Tools
Documentation Bib2Yaml

Why the Second Amendment protects a ‘well-regulated militia’ but not a private citizen militia

@TxA73959

Meta
Domain: @T
Commit: 4
»

Status: head
Author: Ender
Date: 18 June 2021, 9:08 (UTC)

is an article about the recent decision by a California judge to strike down the state’s 32-year old ban on assault weapons [Tx7]. It was written by Eliga Gould, Professor of History at the Univeristy of New Hampshire, and published by the The Conversation.

Details [edit]

Citizen’s militias. U.S. District Court Judge Roger Benitez asserts that citizens have a right to own a private assault weapon not just for defense of a gun owner’s home, but also for “citizens’ militias” engaged in homeland defense [Ix8].

The Constitution is clear. With that said, the only militias protected by the Second Amendment are “well-regulated” units authorized and controlled by state governments, not a private citizen militia [Tx9].

Reference [edit]

Gould, Eliga. n.d. “Why the Second Amendment Protects a ‘Well-Regulated Militia’ but Not a Private Citizen Militia.” The Conversation. http://theconversation.com/why-the-second-amendment-protects-a-well-regulated-militia-but-not-a-private-citizen-militia-162489.