Is It Time To Use Article V Of The US Constitution?

To prevent any erroneous conclusions from my two previous posts, I want to state unequivocally that I support the Second Amendment as it is written, not as it has been manipulated, twisted, contorted and abused to feed some Americans’ obsession with guns.

The Second Amendment (2A) states, “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.”

I believe that one sentence is extremely well crafted to prevent any ambiguity.  However, over time ambiguity has set in, which I attribute to two major changes following the ratification of 2A. Those changes are: 1. The U.S. formed an army several years later (i.e. stopped relying solely on militias) and 2. State governments had greater legislative power until the passage of Amendments 14, 15 and 16 following the Civil War, hence the use of the words, “Militia” and “State.”

Because of the aforementioned changes coupled with the passage of time this ambiguity has arguably increased leading some Americans (including some Justices of the Supreme Court to my chagrin) to now believe 2A means something different than initially intended, such as guns for self-defense.  If these individuals believe so strongly that 2A means something totally different than the original intent then it is imperative for them to seek changes, not through narrow opinions issued by the judicial branch, but from the legislative branch.  These individuals should seek to amend the Constitution via Article V. This process will most likely be nasty, but the debates should undoubtedly determine what we want as a nation.