Well, the President of the United States told us this week, that:

“No amendment, no amendment to the Constitution is absolute,” he said. “You can’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded movie theater — recall a freedom of speech. From the very beginning, you couldn’t own any weapon you wanted to own. From the very beginning that the Second Amendment existed, certain people weren’t allowed to have weapons.”

We need to cut our President some slack, as he suffers from advancing dementia.  If I recall correctly, the text of 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.

Now, the plain text of the amendment looks pretty straightforward to me.  I do not see any mention whatsoever in the Amendment about “weapons”, types of weapons, or who should be allowed to own any particular type of weapon.  I do see, however, the words “Shall Not Be Infringed”.  That says to me that the rights of the people to keep and bear arms cannot be limited by the government (at least by the Federal government).  The definition of the word “infringe” is “act so as to limit or undermine” something, so the Founders’ intentions were quite clear when they wrote this amendment to our Constitution.

To my way of thinking, there is a chance that the federal “background check” system would infringe on the People’s right to keep and bear arms.  I’m not a constitutional scholar, but that’s what it looks like to me.

In any case, our demented President is dead wrong about the Second Amendment allowing “certain people to not have weapons”.

There is no Gun Control in the Second Amendment. [for that matter, most types of modern guns hadn’t even been invented in the 1790s.  The rifle was a new thing, and most soldiers had muskets]