3 ms·

Which part of "shall not be infringed" is unclear? States cannot make laws overriding the constitution's bill of rights.

jfengel 4y ago
What part of "well regulated militia" is unclear? All of it, but it's dishonest to pretend that it doesn't exist.
- seanw444 4y ago
  I'm so sick of hearing this talking point. It's immediately followed by "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Who's right shall not be infringed? The militia's? No. The people's. The militia is made up of the people. The militia has historically been comprised of people bringing their own arms to fight. How do you bring your own arms, when they're banned from personal ownership? James Madison's original draft of the 2A mentioned that even those that wanted to bear arms privately for their own reasons should not be required to participate in a militia in order to do so. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person. It was removed as "too verbose", but the intention still remains.
  - jfengel 4y ago
    I so sick of people quoting part of it. It's dishonest. You can tell yourself that it can be ignored but it's a lie that it doesn't exist.
    - seanw444 4y ago
      It's an explanation for why the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Not the reason. If it said "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed only for the purpose of forming a militia." then I'd agree. But it does not.
- blindmute 4y ago
  Apparently it is unclear to some people, but that's a subordinate clause. It is explaining the following independent clause. "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. " "Because A, B". It is emphatically not, "B if A" or "B for the purposes of A".

jfengel 4y ago

What part of "well regulated militia" is unclear? All of it, but it's dishonest to pretend that it doesn't exist.

seanw444 4y ago
I'm so sick of hearing this talking point. It's immediately followed by "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Who's right shall not be infringed? The militia's? No. The people's. The militia is made up of the people. The militia has historically been comprised of people bringing their own arms to fight. How do you bring your own arms, when they're banned from personal ownership? James Madison's original draft of the 2A mentioned that even those that wanted to bear arms privately for their own reasons should not be required to participate in a militia in order to do so. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person. It was removed as "too verbose", but the intention still remains.
- jfengel 4y ago
  I so sick of people quoting part of it. It's dishonest. You can tell yourself that it can be ignored but it's a lie that it doesn't exist.
  - seanw444 4y ago
    It's an explanation for why the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Not the reason. If it said "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed only for the purpose of forming a militia." then I'd agree. But it does not.
blindmute 4y ago
Apparently it is unclear to some people, but that's a subordinate clause. It is explaining the following independent clause. "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. " "Because A, B". It is emphatically not, "B if A" or "B for the purposes of A".