David Hogg says Second Amendment ‘intentionally misinterpreted’ to protect individual rights
Gun control activist David Hogg revived a previously debunked Second Amendment claim that the Founding Fathers never intended it to protect an individual’s right to own a gun.
Hogg wrote a Twitter thread on Sunday insisting that historians and law professors have informed him that the law was “intentionally misinterpreted” away from its intention to “protect state militias.”
“After reading about the history of the second amend and talking with a lot of hist & law professors- I believe the second amendment has been intentionally misinterpreted. It was never meant as an individual right it was created to protect state militias like the national guard,” Hogg tweeted.
FATHER OF PARKLAND SHOOTING VICTIM SPEAKS OUT ON TRAGIC ANNIVERSARY: ‘CRIMINALS DON’T OBEY GUN LAWS’
Several gun control activists have insisted that the Second Amendment does not protect an individual right to own a gun. (iStock)
He continued, “It says well regulated militia for a reason. The ‘shall not be infringed’ part means the federal government is not allowed to forcibly disarm state militias. I’m not alone in this interpretation. Over 100 years of jurisprudence back me up on this.”
He added, “To those who don’t agree that’s fine- you are entitled to your own opinion and I’m still ready to work with you on what we can agree on. Disagreement and hatred are not the same thing.”
In a later tweet, Hogg also wrote, “Our unregulated militia prevented us from insuring domestic tranquility and promoting the general welfare of our children and citizens. This has prevented us from securing Blessings of Liberty the founders set out to protect in writing our constitution.”
Maine State Sen. Eric Brakey, R., responded, “I’m glad that, after reading about history and talking with professors, you were able to confirm in your mind what you already believed to be true. It’s called confirmation bias.”
“SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Sit down propagandist, our founding fathers knew of people like you,” Republican congressional candidate Jack Lombardi II tweeted.
Prominent political account @PolitiBunny insisted, “If you paid to learn this heap of garbage you should get your money back. Millions of Americans understand the second better than you and they didn’t go to Harvard.”
Parkland school shooting survivor David Hogg speaks to Michigan State University students as they gather to protest gun violence a week after a mass shooting at the State Capitol in Lansing, Michigan, U.S., February 20, 2023. (Reuters)
Attorney Kostas Moros advised, “Your professors should explain why every major 19th century commentator disagrees with them.”
“You should debate someone regarding this claim– or the history of the second amendment, in general. I’d love to hear your expertise,” The Federalist senior editor David Harsanyi joked.
Education expert Deb Fillman wrote, “Removing all doubt that he’s a moron. Groups don’t have ‘rights,’ never mind groups that may or may not exist. ‘Oops, you have no militia, guess you have no right to bear arms…’”
Various liberal media outlets and figures have made the similar claim that the Second Amendment as it was written only protects the “well-regulated militia” rather than an individual right to own a gun.
Washington Post staff writer Amber Phillips wrote in May that the Second Amendment has been “reinterpreted to protect individual rights” by conservative activists. Comedian Dean Obeidallah also wrote that the real claim for individual rights did not exist until the 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision District of Columbia v. Heller.
The Second Amendment 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.” (iStock)
“That’s why we need to make overturning the Heller decision a rallying cry the same way the right made overturning Roe v. Wade its mission. Even though there are some who say the Second Amendment should be repealed, the amendment itself is not the issue,” Obeidallah wrote for MSNBC. “The issue is the GOP-controlled Supreme Court’s rewriting of that amendment in Heller. You don’t need to be a lawyer to understand that the Second Amendment was never intended to provide an individual a constitutional right to possess a gun. The language of this one sentence amendment could not be more clear.”
Liberal pundit Keith Olbermann replied to Hogg’s tweet in agreement on Sunday.
“Note also there is no use of ‘own’ nor any synonym – and this is in a document in which synonyms for ownership outnumber those for rights and voting, combined, by 3:1,” Olbermann tweeted.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Stephen Gutowski, founder of the firearms news site The Reload, previously wrote a lengthy Twitter thread attacking the suggestion that the Second Amendment did not apply to individuals.
“The text of the amendment is very plain. ‘the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed’ The amount of gaslighting people on the left use in regards to the Second Amendment is amazing,” Gutowski said. “Keep doesn’t mean own. The people means the states.”
