Uploaded my law review article critiquing anti-2A history

Excellent read. Thank you!

Yes, good read David.

I became a (very) amateur 2A "scholar" in the early 90's though my first foray into it was in 73 as a Junior in HS when I won the District Championship in Oratory with a speech about it.

But for years since the 90's I've struggled to understand the curious militia clause of the 2A.

And although I agree in a broad sense that it was meant to protect the militia system in reality it was nothing more than a "consolation prize" to the anti-Federalists.

Because the militia clause has no teeth, and changed not one whit of the power relationship between Congress, the States, and the militia, all it is really doing is expressing the idea of the anti-Federalists that feared the standing army and preferred to rely on the militia.

And I've seen no one except Malcolm express it in such a clear manner (I re-read her book recently and was gratified to find her confirmation of what I though was my original idea).

The anti-Federalists did get their desires for a Bill of Rights met, but that lost at every turn to prevent the bane of a standing army.

And the militia clause of the 2A may be the only phrase in the Constitution that is actually without any effect whatsoever.