18th
Of all social issues, gun control doesn’t get me particularly riled. I don’t own one, don’t think I want one, but think I probably should be able to own one, although not because I want to be part of a well-regulated militia. Thinking about it a little more, which is probably the most I have ever thought about it, it does seem kind of odd that owning a gun is a right. Clearly, I am not an NRA member.
The case is interesting for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that it is a paradigm case for Scalia’s brand of originalism. He doesn’t believe in the idea of a “living Constitution” that evolves with societal norms - in his view, if you want to change the Constitution, amend it. Has some intuitive appeal until you consider the near practical impossibility of amending the Constitution.
Heh. So Scalia will dismiss all the precedents which state essentially that the original framers of the Constitution were kidding, and argue that the right to keep and bear arms only applies to members of the well regulated militia (because those precedents aren’t contained in amendments, after all)?
I can’t wait!