Brain357
Platinum Member
- Mar 30, 2013
- 37,068
- 4,189
- 1,130
- Thread starter
- #81
It is quite clearly in reference to a militia.I haven't heard anyone suggest taking all guns, we do need stronger gun laws though. Nobody needs to own a gun for mass killing. The constitution allows arms if you are in a militia.
There is no requirement to be in the militia in order to keep and bear arms
Thats what the second clearly states.
No it doesn't.
It clearly states the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
It says nothing about that right being contingent on service in a militia
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.
It sure doesn't mention self defense....
There is no contingency if there was the right would not have been declared as belonging to the people.
And the security of a free state includes the security of the individuals who make the state possible
You seem to be making up a lot there. Funny.