[ClearCase_guy]

“A well balanced breakfast, being necessary to the healthy start of the day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed.”

Who has the right to food? Is the answer “a well-balanced breakfast” or is it “the people”?

The concept of the militia is not central to the Second Amendment. The right belongs to the people.

[Rebelbase]

Or, as Tom Brokow would say, "“A well balanced breakfast, being necessary to the healthy start of the day important, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed.”"

[robroys woman]

The concept of the militia is not central to the Second Amendment. The right belongs to the people.

---

Though I strongly agree with what you said, I might point out that people that think it’s about hunting look like fools. ;)

[Ancesthntr]

“The concept of the militia is not central to the Second Amendment. The right belongs to the people.”

---

Exactly. The “money clause” of the 2nd Amendment is “...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” It is not dependent upon anything. The 2nd could say, “The Moon, being made of green cheese, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” - and the government would have no right to infringe upon our RKBA...notwithstanding the nonsensical first part of this hypothetical Amendment.

Quite simply, the people who wrote the 2nd wanted to show WHY the 2nd was necessary...but understood quite well that ALL of the rights specified for special protection in the Bill of Rights (including those listed in the 2nd) existed prior to (and independent of) the government. The ONLY purpose of the 2nd is to say, loud and clear, that the RKBA is so basic of a right that the government “shall not infringe” upon it.