Former Supreme Court justice wants to add 5 words to Second Amendment

Retired U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice John Paul Stevens would like to see five words added to Constitution’s Second Amendment, the result of which would be to destroy its intent, and turn the “right to bear arms” into a mere catchphrase lacking meaning. The Second Amendment, which is part of the Bill of Rights, reads:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

In his yet-to-be released book, “Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution,” Stevens suggests that the Second Amendment’s sole purpose was protection against an oppressive standing army — not self-protection in the ordinary sense. Stevens said, according to The Blaze.

Emotional claims that the right to possess deadly weapons is so important that it is protected by the federal Constitution distort intelligent debate about the wisdom of particular aspects of proposed legislation designed to minimize the slaughter caused by the prevalence of guns in private hands.

‘I Am A Ukrainian’ video goes viral; brave young woman pleads for help

He suggested the inclusion of five words for clarification, with the “new and improved” Second Amendment reading, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the militia shall not be infringed.”

By adding those five words — when serving in the militia — Stevens would remove the teeth from the Second Amendment, rendering it impotent.

If it’s clarification Stevens is after, I suggest instead of adding five words, we delete 13 to have it read simply, “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”

Stevens was appointed to the bench in 1975 by then-President Gerald Ford, and retired in 2010 to be succeeded by Elena Kagan.

H/T Independent Journal Review


417 thoughts on “Former Supreme Court justice wants to add 5 words to Second Amendment

  1. 9400budlang8406 says:

    I’m glad he is a FORMER judge. We have plenty of current folks who want to take our freedom so may he stay retired in peace.

  2. andrewwhitehead says:

    How do people who don’t understand plain English get into the Supreme Court?

    1. Arizona Don says:

      That’s a good question but it takes a back seat as to “how did obama a community organizer become president” TWICE?

  3. Cam Stutz says:

    Thank-you all for shedding light on history as it was written. This has been enlightening to read all comments, an education otherwise lost to time.

  4. Arizona Don says:

    Two things such an amendment would change the whole meaning of the second amendment (a change not intended by the writers and signers) and that change would have to go through the same hoops as any change and be confirmed by 38 (3/4) of the states. That will never happen (at least peacefully). Furthermore, any law passed in an attempt to alter in any way the first, second or for that matter any of the bill of rights will be met with violent push back by the citizens. If any liberal progressive communistic democrat wishes to start a war that’s where to get it done, because that will do exactly that. It has twice before and it will again!

  5. Teaparty01 says:

    What a moron.
    Serving in what malitia ?
    does your state have a malitia you can join to protect against the US military ? Where and when do they meet so I can join
    If so give me the details please

  6. John1966 says:

    The man is an idiot and a menace. He is too comfortable in the luxury and safety earned by the founder’s wisdom to comprehend that wisdom. In his tight tunnel-vision and ignorance of history, he has no appreciation of the scale of tyranny that has been, and always will be, avoided by the very concepts he rejects.

  7. will rodgers says:

    If they passed this, and they may, I believe every gun owner in the USA would immediately form local Militias. The net result would be that of the unification of all gun owners into organized Militias. This action would have the exact opposite effect of what Obama and this lame old judge are trying to achieve: the confiscation of arms. It is interesting to note that the Ukranians have asked that the “right to bear arms” be put in their new constitution. As former Soviet Slaves, they understand that when a man has a gun it is more difficult for the government to enslave him.

  8. working4change says:

    I am totally wrong …. but be prepared we may have less then 6vmonths before barry starts something. here or with putin. he has everything in place and more then enough citizens pissed enough to stand upto him.

    pray for the best but prepare for the worst

Comments are closed.

Related Posts