Here’s what I got.
Gun control advocates love to hate District of Columbia v. Heller, the 2008 case in which the Supreme Court recognized that the Second Amendment protects
reason.com
It is not cut&dry, and I acknowledge that usage, as well as the needs of a society in a way the Framers could not have anticipated, have changed and not just a little.
Add to this that the last two years have shown a cultural shift that became obvious: “a man and his musket” has transformed to groups of LARPing Klansmen with black rifles chatting up equally fascist cops. Repellent.
So I am ambivalent and a bit agonized. The Constitution was written with some glaring holes. “Every man was created equal” unless you were chattel, a pesky Native or female.
So consider me playing devil’s arvocate on the general principle of unintended consequences, but on the bottom line uncertain and capable of being convinced in the direction of less guns. The epidemiology of gun possession is sort of compelling.