[TheRealThing]

If the SCOTUS were to determine that the 2nd Amendment did not cover sawed-off shotguns, as it once did, or military style "mass kill" weapons, as it might in the future, and if the reason be "promote the general welfare," I am not going to think that the end of "the American experiment" is nigh. Further, I don't think interpreting the 2nd Amendment must be, of necessity, a partisan political act. I think one could contemplate "promoting the general welfare," look at the phrase "well regulated," and conclude the 2nd Amendment did not envision any citizen any gun any time.

And there in the midst of your contemplations and the resultant ill advised conclusions attached thereto, you'd find yourself firmly entrenched among a very small minority of liberal true believers; Desperately searching for the right catch phrase to effectively do another DADT-esque flyby on the American public. This time however, I do not believe you're going to see it happen, that is the American people accepting gun control . As you point out the SC did outlaw sawed off shotguns at one point, the bias of that ruling was later recognized and the Justices overturned their own decision.

You cannot hope to drag out some dishwater weak misinterpretation of a phrase like "well regulated," taking it completely out of context, then add further insult to injury in redefining it's true meaning and expect the people to stand idly by and watch the second Amendment get struck down because they have been sufficiently hazed, not this time.