I am aware that the United States Supreme court decided that the right to keep and bear arms was without context and distinctly individual.  District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S.Ct. 2783, 554 U.S. 570, 171 L.Ed.2d 637, 76 U.S.L.W. 4631, (2008).

I am also aware that those who publicly argue for an unfettered individual right to bear arms usually do so in context.  Here are some of the contextual arguments given for the individual right to bear arms, worded as if they were in the Constitution just like the clause that actually is.

United States Constitution, Amendment II.

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.


Not the United States Constitution, Amendment II.

A highly profitable gun manufacturing sector, being necessary to secure the reelection of supporting politicians, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

A perceived need for recreational shooting, being necessary to entertain certain citizens, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

A finely honed desire to kill animals for sport, being necessary to maintain resorts for shooting birds and harvesting farmed deer, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

A misguided and mentally unbalanced person, being necessary to right perceived wrongs by wantonly killing other persons, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

A slaughtered community, being necessary to remind survivors of the power of a weapon in misguided hands, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Still not the United States Constitution, Amendment II.

A periodic slaying of a wrongdoer by firearm, being necessary to defend one’s self or others, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Bob Congdon
June 21, 2016, November 8, 2017