"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."
- Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
Many people are using this amendment to justify carrying guns to defend themselves against what they believe is the tyranny of the state. But the amendment doesn't mention the security of the "people"; it says that a militia is necessary for the security of the state.
Moreover, Article I, Section 8, enumerating the powers of Congress states that it shall have the power
"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;"
Some of the people who want to be armed against a tyrannical state give a broad definition of the Militia, citing some law defining the Militia, that the Militia includes most adult males.
So, if those arming themselves against a tyrannical state rise up against a state they judge tyrannical, then they should obey Congress when they are called upon to put down their own insurrection.
Oh, well! As I read somewhere lately, the Constitution is not a coherent philosophical document, but a political document full of compromises and sometimes inconsistencies. Too many people are making it a philosophical document, selecting only those clauses that support their political beliefs.
