text: You really want to direct people to Heller, Dog?  
  
  You risk folks coming to the realization that the internet representations of the Second Amendment have been liberally (or conservatively as the case may be) edited and bastardized to support NRA-speak.
  
  Never understood how the SCOTUS took concept that "a well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state" (which is what the 2nd actually says) and extended to a right not to be required to have trigger locks on home kept weapons.   An additional low point for the same basic Court that gave us Citizens United.
  
  Both good examples of how constitutional provisions, and their interpretation are subject to political winds as much as legal ones.   Which is why I agree that as currently configured, the SCOTUS takes the side of gun likers to use the 2nd to knockout any attempt to legislate gun restrictions.
  
  But, that doesn't stop constitutional amendment, nor future changes to the make up of the Supreme Court.