The subject of this article is
controversial and content may be in
dispute. When updating the article,
be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a
neutral point of view. Include
citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. Any such comments
may be removed or
refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Second Amendment to the United States Constitution at the
Reference desk. This is not a place for general discussion of the right to bear arms, or for discussion of personal research about the Second Amendment
This article is written in
American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
Second Amendment to the United States Constitution was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the
good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be
renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the
legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States Constitution, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
Constitution of the United States on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States ConstitutionWikipedia:WikiProject United States ConstitutionTemplate:WikiProject United States ConstitutionUnited States Constitution articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the
discussion and see a list of
open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, which has been
designated as a contentious topic.
It does not say only Self defense and the way it is written in the post is they ruled that it was self defense. "such as self-defense within the home" this allows for more uses of a the right to arms. It also does not state the main purpose of District of Columbia v. Heller was to "struck down provisions of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 as unconstitutional" thus regulating the methods that a citizen wished to keep their ARMS was not up for debate.
2601:5CC:C701:8000:9196:5B69:D4F2:B63 (
talk) 02:58, 14 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Second Amendment doesn't say "self-defense", it says "security of a free state" which is state and national defense.
They also repealed the Militia Act of 1792 in 1795, revised to read repealed at the bottom. Obsolescence of the militia as time went on.
76.135.35.127 (
talk) 18:24, 1 September 2023 (UTC)reply
The Militia Act of 1792 was repealed and replaced with the Militia Act of 1795. Which in turn was also repealed and replaced with the Militia Act of 1903, which remains standing law today codified under 10 USC 246.
Solaran X (
talk) 16:22, 10 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Indeed 10 USC 246(b)(1) is well regulated.
But did the 1903 Sec. 25 deregulate 246(b)(2) to the extent that it is no longer "well regulated"
Afterall the prefatory clause of the second amendment does not say:
"A well regulated fraction portion of the Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Philfromwaterbury (
talk) 14:20, 12 November 2023 (UTC)reply