Here�s an interesting law review article called
The Hidden History of the Second Amendment. You can download and read the article at URL,
http://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/Vol31/vol31_no2.html. The article describes the deliberations of our new nation over the right to bear arms. Apparently, at issue was the right of a state to maintain �a well regulated militia� to suppress slave revolts. Southerners knew of Northern hostility towards slavery and feared that Congress may be reluctant to support militias designed to suppress slave insurrections.
The object of the 2nd Amendment was neither to fight foreign aggression nor to fight domestic tyranny. Southern colonies were reluctant to commit their militias to the Revolutionary War, preferring to reserve them for slave control. Disappointed with the performance of militias during the Revolutionary War and during Shay�s Rebellion, the new nation sought a federal army to fight both foreign and domestic threats.
The 2nd Amendment had little to do with an individual�s right to bear arms. The reaction to Shay�s Rebellion removed any sentiment for a �right to rebel� against an oppressive state. It had much to do with the fear of slave revolts and the desire of Southern states to maintain �a well regulated Militia� to suppress these revolts.
The article asserts that an individual right to bear arms was a recent invention. When the NRA fought the Brady Bill, it did not cite the 2nd Amendment but instead cited the 10th Amendment exclusively. It was only later that the �Insurrectionist Theory� was formulated with NRA funding.
I invite everyone to read the article and comment.
