Gun Control & RKBA

jmg257

(11,996 posts)

8. You overly complicated it in your "translation"...

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 02:37 PM

Jan 2017

"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"

Easily can be said as:

Because well regulated militias are necessary to the security of free states, the people shall not have their right to KEEP and BEAR arms infringed.

Pretty straight forward (even in its original form), as to WHY the right was specifically secured. {do not underestimate the importance of the people/state militias! They are vital to securing our freedoms, as listed in the constitution!!}

But what really matters is that the right WAS and IS specifically secured.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

46 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

How is Meatloaf's 'Id Do Anything for Love' like the 2nd Amendment? [View all] HAB911 Jan 2017 OP

Wrong discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2017 #1

um.. mac56 Jan 2017 #6

At the time of ratification sarisataka Jan 2017 #9

As my learned associate sarisataka has explained... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2017 #17

The Democratic party says the 2A supports an individual right to keep and bear arms. hack89 Jan 2017 #2

There is no basis to the popular myth needledriver Jan 2017 #3

You are right...the 2nd did NOT give the people the right to bear arms. jmg257 Jan 2017 #4

+1 Doug.Goodall Jan 2017 #13

errors in your reasoning jimmy the one Jan 2017 #29

Error in your reasoning: yagotme Jan 2017 #38

Never understood why sarisataka Jan 2017 #5

I believe the placement of the comma's yagotme Jan 2017 #7

+1 Doug.Goodall Jan 2017 #14

You overly complicated it in your "translation"... jmg257 Jan 2017 #8

Why does the word "arms" safeinOhio Jan 2017 #10

It doesn't refer only to firearms sarisataka Jan 2017 #11

taking rawle out of context jimmy the one Jan 2017 #30

Thank you for your support sarisataka Jan 2017 #33

sorry sari, wrong era webster's jimmy the one Jan 2017 #42

Cherry picking key words.. sarisataka Jan 2017 #44

It doesn't. Swords pistols accoutrements jmg257 Jan 2017 #12

Aw man. Ya' done opened up a can of worms now. Ya' done blasphemed flamin lib Jan 2017 #15

You mean Democratic Party talking points don't you? hack89 Jan 2017 #16

How many guns do you own, again? Or, shall I say, "cling to"? Marengo Jan 2017 #18

Your awkward question will no doubt go unanswered... friendly_iconoclast Jan 2017 #24

Might have saved yourself the effort. It's settled law now, at least for the foreseeable future. Marengo Jan 2017 #19

I just want to thank everyone for sharing their opinion.........n/t HAB911 Jan 2017 #20

You're welcome discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2017 #21

See post #19. It's a matter of *FACT* -- *not* opinion. NT pablo_marmol Jan 2017 #22

I just want to thank everyone for sharing their opinion.........n/t HAB911 Jan 2017 #23

I think there's an echo in here... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2017 #25

No, the bill of rights "gives" nothing. X_Digger Jan 2017 #26

original wording was for the militia interpretation jimmy the one Jan 2017 #27

I'm really surprised no one has claimed HAB911 Jan 2017 #28

I think Hamilton was 1 of the 1st..the militia is much more of a defensive notion against tyranny jmg257 Jan 2017 #35

LOL, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, HAB911 Jan 2017 #36

You'll have to find someone who said it did. This is Hamilton's quote. jmg257 Jan 2017 #37

See: yagotme Jan 2017 #39

LOL!...........n/t HAB911 Jan 2017 #41

british scholars weighed in, after heller jimmy the one Jan 2017 #31

story & oliver support the militia view jimmy the one Jan 2017 #32

"probably" sarisataka Jan 2017 #34

They don't count. yagotme Jan 2017 #40

another sorry attempt re founding father quotes on 2ndA jimmy the one Jan 2017 #43

In all of your extended quotes sarisataka Jan 2017 #45

In your quote below, yagotme Jan 2017 #46