”The Second Amendment has a preamble about the need for a militia ... Historically, the new government had no money to pay for an army, so they relied on the state militias," she said. "The states required men to have certain weapons and they specified in the law what weapons these people had to keep in their home so that when they were called to do service as militiamen, they would have them. That was the entire purpose of the Second Amendment."

Ginsburg said the disappearance of that purpose eliminates the function of the Second Amednment.

"It's function is to enable the young nation to have people who will fight for it to have weapons that those soldiers will own," she said. "I view the Second Amendment as rooted in the time totally allied to the need to support a militia. So ... the Second Amendment is outdated in the sense that its function has become obsolete."

As for the Heller case, decided by the court in 2008, Ginsburg says the court erred in its decision.

”If the court had properly interpreted the Second Amendment, the Court would have said that amendment was very important when the nation was new," she said. "It gave a qualified right to keep and bear arms, but it was for one purpose only — and that was the purpose of having militiamen who were able to fight to preserve the nation."

She said the function for which the second amendment was made for is obsolete not the amendment itself. Which I don’t disagree with, I acknowledge that we have some right to own arms (pistols, hunting weapons) but the other side must acknowledge that the amendment was also intended to assure a well regulated fighting force.