For most of American history, it was seen as a human right to be able to own a weapon, on par with freedom of religion.
A good indication of this is how the restrictive Black Codes passed in 1865 by Southern States, which was before Reconstruction was put into action, and therefore some of the most racist and right depriving laws in American history, did not go far enough to ban Black people from owning guns. Despite everything in those Codes, the right to bear arms was not infringed upon, even on former slave populations.
Repealing the 2nd Amendment would be unheard of, considered tyrannical and an abomination, not to mention destructive for people who needed them to survive.
Your best bet to get this to occur is in the last 20 years. Perhaps Right Wing Militia groups in the 90s under Clinton start doing mass shootings on the scale of hundreds of people killed with guns that were legal rather than illegal. That is the only way I can see something like this having a chance.
Does repealing the 2nd amendment mean actually banning all weapon ownership though?
There are numerous countries without a constitutional right to own arms where arms can be purchased albeit with some restrictions often.
There are some groups who are working to repeal the 2nd amendment now but not necessarily trying to ban or confiscate all guns but mainly to proceed with gun legislation less impeded by the 2nd amendment.
I can't see why the 2nd Amendment would be repealed without having some kind of attempt at gun grabbing. Why would they want or need to do it?
I suppose if the 2nd Amendment had some other right in it that was considered bad later on, like for example, the right to form a lynch mob, or the right to secede from the Union, than maybe there is something to it.
But repealing the 2nd amendment yet doing nothing about gun ownership seems kind of dumb to me.
But repealing the 2nd amendment yet doing nothing about gun ownership seems kind of dumb to me.
With A POD from anytime from 1788 to the present how can the 2nd amendment have been repealed from the US constitution?
...gun-control proponents insisted that, rightly interpreted, the Second Amendment was no obstacle to laws limiting or even outlawing individual ownership of firearms...
ASB.
“Rightly interpreted”, indeed.![]()
I am taking no position
The first federal case that interpreted the Second Amendment as protecting an individual right was *United States v. Emerson*, 270 F.3d 203 (5th Cir. 2001). Even then some other circuits disagreed, and the matter was not resolved by the Supreme Court until *Heller.* As long as they were winning in the federal courts, as they seemed to be doing before 2001, there was no incentive for gun control advocates to seek the repeal of the Second Amendment.