As a consequence, when the gun control activists only look at a specific part of the amendment they can easily interpret it so that it supports their cause. David Clark is such an activist, and he believes that because the 2nd amendment says “well regulated militia,” then the amendment only protects the states rights in forming government ran militias, not individual rights in owning firearms (Young 70). As a result of his interpretation of the amendment, Clark is able to say that the Constitution reinforces his call for gun control. So to people who aren’t as educated in this specific topic, Clark’s view is taken as truth since he says the Constitution backs him up. Sadly a lot of people don’t do their own research and take other’s views
