NC Dem: Second Amendment Does Not Define Itself As Absolute

NC Dem: Second Amendment Does Not Define Itself As Absolute

On May 27, retired North Carolina state senator Ellie Kinnard (D) used an editorial to argue that the Second Amendment does not define itself as absolute and that the Supreme Court made a mistake by “expanding gun accessibility” via the Heller (2008) decision. 

Published in The Durham News, Kinnard wrote that the Second Amendment was meant to protect a collective right tied to militia service “for our nation’s security.” And to show how far we have fallen from the true scope of the right, she asked what an “armed…Chicago ghetto kid” or “drug gang member” with an “assault weapon” has to do with “our nation’s security?”

She also asked what “people willy-nilly carrying guns…in restaurants, play grounds, and on college campuses” have to with “the security of a free State?” 

Kinnard says the Supreme Court got it wrong in Heller (2008), and that it was not the first time they have been wrong. She shows that they were wrong on Dred Scot (1857), on Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), and in Lochner v. New York (1905) too. 

She says “it’s hard to fathom” how “the Supreme Court made the jump to allowing guns to be carried by individuals for their own purpose.”  

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins  Reach him directly at 


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.