[Cryptography] 2nd Amendment Case for the Right to Bear Crypto

[Ron Garret]

On May 12, 2016, at 11:46 AM, John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:

> Historically, the 2nd amendment was interpreted to refer to the state militias, i.e. the National
> Guard.  In recent years the revisionist insurrectionist theory has become popular, and it's
> been interpreted to refer to personal ownership of some set of weapons.

It’s done more than become popular, it is the law of the land:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._City_of_Chicago

Personally, I think the supreme court got this right.  The structure of the 2nd amendment is, “Because A, therefore B.”  The argument that because A is no longer applicable in today’s world then neither is B makes the tacit assumption that A is the *only* justification for B.  I see no basis for making that leap.  If the American people want to clarify the matter (or change it outright) they can amend the Constitution.  But polls show an overwhelming majority supporting the Heller decision.

rg