"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
What part of “...shall not be infringed.” do they not understand?
Many people are vulnerable to physical force; a gun in the hands of a responsible citizen is the equalizer.
Only in the Second Amendment, when interpreted by gun grabbers, does "the people" refer to some collective right.
This is what we get if we follow the road of a “living, breathing Constitution:....because when they rip one part of it out, they will rip it all apart...IF we let them.
Meadow Muffin
There are only 2 ways to look at it:
1 The right to bear arms depends on the militia;
2 The militia depends on the right to bear arms.
How can any literate person read 2A and not see which one is the correct reading?
That said, I’m sure sorry they phrased it that way, but how could they know that 200 years of progress would make so many fools?
Wrong question. "Are Constitutional limitations preventing government from violating our right to self-defense hanging on a comma?"
Government has no power to give rights and no authority to take them. When that principle is overthrown our Constitution has been overthrown. At that point I will still be a sovereign individual and the government will be an outlaw.
IBrp. RIP.
“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.”
“A Box of Jelly Donuts, being necessary to feed Elvis, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
It means exactly the same thing reguardless of the reason the founders gave for putting it in.
Wonder what would happen if it went the way of Prohibition? Black market guns, right? The value of which would increase a thousand fold ... BTW, read where there are 99 guns per 100 population ... try taking them ....
The slightest bit of reading of the Founders' contemporaneous statements on bearing arms would instantly disabuse folks of any thought that they only envisioned the 2nd as a collective right.
btt
A militia in good order, being necessary for the security of a free society, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
I can see the confusion. /s
My right to bear arms is constrained only by some fools willingness to come to my door to collect mine.
This is the one true talent of the left - splitting hairs (and communities). If you’ve engaged one of them on a blog that is advanced beyond pure vitriol, you’ve been witness to the hyper-parsing that they enjoy.
They live to slice those commas! No matter how clear and unambiguous a quote, a citation, or a statute is, they “discover” nuances in the language and exploit it to fracture the common understanding (see Roe v. Wade).
It happens every day and on every subject, and our most sacred traditions like the US Constitution is their greatest target with the 2nd Amendment being the holy grail.
They will never stop the assault so we must never stop our vigilance.
Breaking the debate down to the meaning of commas is nothing but desperation by the gun grabbing liberals. All anyone has to do is read the writings of the Founders as well as the political thought of that era to know they believed in the sacred right of individuals to keep and bear arms.
The spacing of the words makes it seems that they did indeed goof and add an extraneous comma. But it is very difficult to confirm.
The best I could do under the ambient light, the handheld camera I had, and the press of the line behind me, is this...
Unfortunately, photobucket converts to a jpg, but I hope that it's clear that there's a gap, but the lead-in of the "s" in "shall" takes up much of that gap. Is there really a comma, or is that just the lead-in to the "s" character?
We must never concede on their assaults to our natural rights!
