Quote:
Originally posted by longrange1947
RL, can you explain why an amendment was required to arm the militia when Artical I section 8 of the constitution provides for arming of the militia?
You did a good job of finding the left coast version of the 2nd amendment. 
|
Quote:
Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
|
Good rhetorical question!
The militia was already armed. The purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure that it cannot be disarmed. The clauses above are express congressional powers.
BTW, Eugene Volokh is probably the leading conservative scholar in this area. He clerked for Alex Kozinski, who is one of the few conservatives on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. I would not call his views "left coast" views any more than I would call my views representative of Los Angeles lawyers. LOL