This concerned citizen has long been troubled by the level of senseless violence in the United States. At the same time, this citizen came to understand that the intense effort to manipulate national attitudes on and understanding of the Second Amendment is, in fact, a threat to societal stability in many ways.

In trying to grasp what could be done to counter this relentless campaign that is so dangerous to the country, one comes to realize that, in fact, the Second Amendment was the third serious flaw in the U.S. Constitution, along with the endorsement of slavery and denial of the vote to women. The incredible numbers of firearm victims each year, the tragic toll of innocent victims of an increasing number of mass casualty events over recent decades, and the manipulative dismissal by Justice Scalia in Heller (2008) of the Amendment’s prefatory clause focused on “A well regulated militia, necessary to the security of a free State” lead one to a singular conclusion, namely that the Amendment’s Constitutional understanding needs to reflect both the reality of the words ratified in 1791 as well as the America of the 21st century.

Justice Kavanaugh, writing a contributing opinion in Rahimi, stated the obvious and remarkably gave the lie to much of the Court’s recent jurisprudence on the Second Amendment, beginning with Heller and continuing to the cases decided in 2026.

According to Kavanaugh,  

“The first and most important rule in constitutional interpretation is to heed the text—that is, the actual words of the Constitution—and to interpret that text according to its ordinary meaning as originally understood. The text of the Constitution is the “Law of the Land.” Art. VI. As a general matter, the text of the Constitution says what it means and means what it says. And unless and until it is amended, that text controls.”  

“As the Court’s decision today notes, Second Amendment jurisprudence is still in the relatively early innings, unlike the First, Fourth, and Sixth Amendments, for example. That is because the Court did not have occasion to recognize the Second Amendment’s individual right until recently.”‍ ‍

In view of Kavanaugh’s clear admission, misrepresentations of the Second Amendment by SCOTUS, leading politicians and the gun lobby and its network of supporting organizations should no longer be ignored. Rather, they demand sustained response and rebuttal.

This web site’s objective is simple: to encourage a long overdue honest national discussion on the relevance of the Amendment’s 235 year-old text to the true “originalism” of the debates in the the 1st and 2nd Congresses and the reality of the United States of America in 2026. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has allowed a significant relaxation of restrictions on concealed carry, and some states are doing the same with regard to open carry.

Put simply, it’s way beyond time for a serious and constructive non-partisan discussion of those poorly drafted 27 words of the Second Amendment, enacted in long ago 1791, and of the distorted history and jurisprudence asserted in the impactful Heller and Bruen (2022) Supreme Court rulings and the seeming partisan political motivations of those flawed decisions’ authors.