[flashbunny]

read his other posts on other gun related topics. He professes to be know about the constitution, but he doesn't think the 2nd amendment was put their to prevent governmental tyranny, despite quotes from the founding fathers. He is basically a one-note blowhard expert who thinks he is right about everything. Any attempt to debate with logic is futile.

[justshutupandtakeit]

It wasn't even IN the constitution until amended.

Militia's were under state control and not recognized as such unless officered by officers appointed by the state and trained under federal regulation.

Read the amendment and you will see that it clearly states the militias' purpose "...being necessary to the security of a free STATE, ...." says nothing about protection FROM the state. I am sure such points mean nothing to you.

Their practical function was almost entirely to protect the citizenry from Indian attacks. Against a real army they were of limited use and those among the founders who had served in the Continental Army well understood this.

A "one-note blowhard?" Please, I use the whole Octave and it sounds much more harmonious than the atonal screaching from you boys.

Oh, you might want to check your writing so that one does not get the idea that you can't think OR write correctly.