The 2nd Amendment states, "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." As with the Supreme Court 30 years ago, I take this to mean that individuals have the right to carry guns only to the extent that the state needs citizens to have guns to maintain a militia. Hence the right to bear arms is a collective right of the state rather than an individual right
Yet as this article states, the NRA started supporting research, scholarships, and seminars beginning in the 1970s. After a few years, the number of academic articles interpreting the 2nd Amendment in favor of individual rights began to increase. Over time, the number of publications favoring individual gun rights began outnumbering those interpreting the amendment as one about state needs to maintain a militia. In a 30 year span, then, the NRA helped reshape the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, culminating in District of Columbia v. Heller in which the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of individual having the right to bear arms (the case was directed against the DC ban on guns). Here's a CRS overview of gun ownership and the Supreme Court.
Clifford Bob may have already raised this issue in his book The Global Right and the Clash of World Politics, but this is a fascinating case study of framing and norms construction. How activists (or in this case a powerful lobby) quietly work to reinterpret laws which wind up having huge implications for politics. The irony in all this is that no one even cared about the 2nd Amendment prior to the NRA's advocacy.
An excellent counterpoint to this study is what is currently happening to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Here the shift is even more astounding. The figure below tracks attitudes towards gay marriage in a span of 20 years.
From Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Clint Eastwood, Robert Porter, to President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and a slew of other recent converts, it seems like support for gay marriage is spreading fast. Obama himself saw that the fight for gay marriage would take place at the state level producing a cascade-effect which would shore up a case for federal support for gay marriage in the future. Here's a PBS News Hour transcript outlining this trend. I am not a supporter of gay marriage (my reason is simple, but the rationale is complicated) but in thinking about other rights movements (civil rights in particular) we do seem to have reached some type of tipping point.
