◀Previous Post
Next Post▶

Misquoted but well-used.

 

◀Previous Post
Next Post▶

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

94 COMMENTS

    • Not necessarily. I’ve used this analogy to explain how it’s vital to view something through the original author’s POV, and from his timeframe:

      Consider the simple phrase, “I’m going down the street to buy some coke.”

      In modern times and in most circumstances, that would mean you’re going to buy a carbonated beverage treat.

      In a 1980s metro inner city, that might mean you’re going for cocaine.

      In an 1880s city or suburb, that might mean you’re going for heating coal to heat your home.

      ****
      Original intent matters.

      • Not according to the modern Democrat party, to them words mean what they want them to mean right now.

      • If I said I was going to but some coke, it would be processed coal for my forge. Green, or raw/unprocessed coal smokes and has a high sulfur content. I can use it, but would have to coke it down first.
        And you are correct in how original intent/parlance/meanings do matter.

      • Haz, none of that refutes what eagle10 said. He’s entirely correct. All these professional grifters know exactly what it means. They always have. And they will always twist it to pander to the more stoopider amongst us. It’s what they do, bro. You know this.

        • I believe a few “grifters” know, but I’m convinced most congresscritters have no clue. I present to you the venerable AOC as evidence.

        • Quote: “I believe a few “grifters” know, but I’m convinced most congresscritters have no clue. I present to you the venerable AOC as evidence.”

          AOC has proven many times she has no clue….of most anything.

      • Haz, point taken and a fine example but being clueless doesn’t exclude also being a grifter. The AOC unit is, I’m quite sure, right in there with the rest of them, even if a ‘special’ case…

    • 1. To adjust by rule, method or established mode; as, to regulate weights and measures; to regulate the assize of bread; to regulate our moral conduct by the laws of God and of society; to regulate our manners by the customary forms.
      http://webstersdictionary1828.com › …
      Regulate – Websters 1828 Dictionary

        • No, well regulated means exactly what you see in the Webster’s 1828 definition:

          “To adjust by rule, method or established mode”

          The constitution requires Congress establish rules for the conduct, discipline and training of the militias, both organized and unorganized.

        • Immaterial Miner.

          “I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials.” – George Mason

          George Mason was the author of the 2nd amendment. So it was always the intention the populace be armed. Since the 2nd amendment has not been repealed, you’ll have to just chew on it.

          Further, well regulated did NOT mean gun control. People that believe that, are total fools. Well regulated did NOT mean if you want gun rights, you need to join the national guard. Those people are total fools. You can make yourself “well regulated” without a government nanny.

      • Hey, MinorIQ,

        Why are you so (intentionally) selective about the parts of your “dictionary” that you quote???

        The ACTUAL 1823 Webster’s (a pedant would note that 1823 is over 30 years after the document in question was written, but I won’t go there . . . yet) definition reads as follows:

        “REGULATE, v.t.
        1. To adjust by rule, method or established mode; as, to regulate weights and measures; to regulate the assize of bread; to regulate our moral conduct by the laws of God and of society; to regulate our manners by the customary forms.
        2. To put in good order; as, to regulate the disordered state of a nation or its finances.
        3. To subject to rules or restrictions; as, to regulate trade; to regulate diet.”

        WHY, an intelligent person might ask, did you INTENTIONALLY truncate your “quote” of the definition and, based on the ACTUAL definition (as I reproduced IN FULL) did you adopt your interpretation as being the “correct” reading??

        After all, you MIGHT have pointed to the part that says “To adjust by rule, METHOD or ESTABLISHED MODE”, or the part that says “. . . to regulate our moral conduct by the laws of God and of society . . . ” or the part that says “. . . to regulate our manners by the CUSTOMARY FORMS . . . ” or the part that says “To put in good order . . . “. But you didn’t. WHY NOT, MajorStupidity??

        And then you have the nerve to say “That’s what Webster’s says”, and intentionally IMPLY that that was the totality of the definition??? WHY??? Oh, because you are a lying Leftist/fascist propagandist, as we all knew.

        F*** off, MajorStupidity. You are a lying liar of a Leftist propagandist, and nothing you say is worthy of consideration. Just return to your circle jerk.

        • Exactly why I end nearly each response to Whiner reminding him his comments are laughable. 👍

        • Oh, jwm, if you like that, PLEASE ask him to explain to you why Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate gun use by ANYONE, whether or not part of a militia. It’s a laugh riot.

          MinorIQ is a dishonest partisan hack, pretending to sophistication, and desperately trying to assert intellectual adequacy, but failing at everything. He’s SO caught up in his ridiculous world view that he will reject any reality, no matter what, in favor of his beloved narrative.

          He’s a wannabe “intellectual” clown, who hasn’t had an original thought in his freakin’ life.

  2. ‘Civilized’ is another word I don’t think they know the meaning of. And ‘Studies’. “Rights’ vs. ‘Privileges’.

    I’d say they were shockingly ignorant and uneducated.

    • You missed it, .40 cal, MinorIQ already tried that s*** up above. I spanked him, but it won’t do any good – I and others have spanked him on that numerous times, and he just keeps coming back with the same lying nonsense. Ask him, sometime, to expound on the rights Congress has pursuant to Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, and how that applies to GENERAL gun control. It’s a hoot.

  4. well-regulated means well-practiced, well-drilled, well-taught, well-led, in a functional militia unit, for the defense of a free state.

    not standing alone saying “I’m the militia and I’m ok.”

    • runt 1/2 ass, what would you know about any of it? We’ll wait while you ask pencil neck in a closed chat room what you should say. Get back to us.

    • “not standing alone saying “I’m the militia and I’m ok.””

      Wrong, the militia is comprised of two (2) classes, the organized (National Guard) and the unorganized (“We, the people,…” and – “The right of the people to keep and bear arms…”)

      2 Militias, son…

      • There was no “National Guard” in existence when the Constitution was written and ratified, nor for more than a century thereafter. There were just civilians in ‘local militias’ and soldiers in ‘standing armies’.

        “…the United States endured three wars—the War of 1812, the Civil War, and the Spanish-American War—and (found) the militia was ineffective in all three (failing short of NATIONAL military needs). Congress (passed) the Dick Act of 1903 {32 Stat. 775} (to provide for) a modern fighting machine” (to meet national and global needs).

        The (1903) Dick Act provided for … the National Guard—that would conform to the organization of the Army, be equipped through federal funds, and be trained by Army instructors. The act consisted of 26 sections and set forth new provisions that had previously only applied to the Army, but now also applied to the newly formed National Guard, including a nine-month limit for reservists’ service on active duty, a provision that when on active duty, the reservists would be guided by Army rules and regulations and would receive the same pay as that given to Army soldiers, and a new requirement for the performance of 24 drills per year and a five-day summer camp. The act also gave states’ governors certain powers over their Guard units… (https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/15%e2%80%9316)

        Before Congress’ formal legislation authorizing and forming the National Guard in 1903, 114 years after our Republic was founded and our Constitution ratified, the Founders understood the definition of Constitutional militias quite well. “I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials.” – George Mason

      • It would’ve been hilarious if “well hung” was actually the parlance of the day in place of “well regulated”. Well, sorta…

        • OK, Rider, I didn’t know that was common slang in y’all’s part of the world, but I snorted beer through my nose when I read your comment (that hurts like HELL!!).

        • possum,

          “Sheriff, we heard that you was hung!” Sheriff Bart: “And you heard right!”

    • Well regulated means properly functioning. As in a well regulated clock would mean a clock the keeps accurate time.

      • Yeah, oldmaninAL, we’ve been trying to explain to MinorIQ for a long time why his interpretation is incorrect and/or dishonest, but he keeps coming back with the SAME nonsense.

        What’s funny is that even IF he were right (he isn’t), it doesn’t matter since “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” is a prefatory clause and cannot, under the rules of normal grammar, limit or counteract the OPERATIVE clause of “. . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Haven’t finally decided if MinorIQ is just an outright liar, or if he’s too stupid to understand the rules of grammar – but, embrace the healing power of “and”.

      • “As in a well regulated clock”

        I pointed this out to Whiner over two years ago.

        According to whinerlogic (aka: progtardation), accurate “Regulated” clock were ONLY accurate because a Government beurocracy told them to be such. 🤪

        💨☝️, Feel that breeze whiner?
        That’s the readers of this TTAG comment section rapidly expelling air while laughing at your ignorance. 🤣

      • Extensive laboratory testing of copralite samples nearing the end of the 18th century from various eastern/central North American sites verifies that the ‘newly indigenous’ but still largely European population was indeed ‘well regulated’. The invading forces of the opposing British Monarchy, most especially after initial contact with aforementioned parties… not so much. You are what you eat.

        • exactly. franklin mentions his “morning constitution” followed by an “air bath.”

        • tsbhoa, also, supposedly, from Franklin when reprimanded by a lady of the day for having a large gut “imagine, Mr Franklin, if such a vast stomach were to be seen upon a woman!” whereupon Franklin replied “but Ma’am, just mere hours ago this very stomach was indeed upon a woman”.

    • rant7,

      Gee, you’re in good company, siding with MinorIQ!! See my reply to him, above. I express the same sentiments to you, Leftist/fascist.

  5. Hey! That was a great movie. Enjoyed it with my children often. Good moral lessons there for kids. Still take a minute to watch a scene when channel surfing. “Prepare to die!”

    • In TheForce.net fan films is a really good homage to the Princess Bride, but with lightsabers. Good fight scene.

  6. Training
    AR15
    Magazine vs. Clip
    Bullet button
    High capacity
    Survival Rifle
    Saturday night special
    Constitutional Carry
    Mil spec

    The list of these words and phrases goes on and on.

  7. Prndll, not sure where that comment was going, but I’ll bite:
    Training, get all you can. If it’s quality. If you know what you’re doing, you’ll know the difference.
    AR-15, sigh. It’s popular. That don’t make it good.
    Magazine vs. clip. My son’s M1A takes a magazine. His 1903 takes a clip. He’s known the difference since he was six. He’s twenty-five now.
    Bullet button. What’s that!?
    High capacity. My magazine loaded to capacity? I guess?
    Survival rifle. The rifle I have while I’m trying to survive. I know I got that one right!
    Saturday Night Special. The handgun I carry on those rare special occasions that I go out on a Saturday night. Probably got that one right.
    Constitutional Carry. What I do every day. I don’t care what they call it. I ain’t got a permit, but I have a gun. Even in the post office last week. Fuck ’em if they can’t take a joke. That one is definitely right!
    Mil-Spec. The lowest bidder.
    Was that a quiz? Looked like one. How’d I do?

    • Well Regulated = Well Mantained
      Just because we are used to the idea of “government regulation”, the word ‘regulated’ should not be attributed to any form of governmental control or governmental body.

      There is a reason they are called ‘voltage regulators’.

      As to the rest, many here do have this well understood but far too many people out there in readerville can quite easily be swayed by nonsense. That means the best way to get the most people on board the fastest is to be honest, direct, and up front holding back no secrets or ambiguity.

      AR15’s and nearly all modern handguns use ‘magazines’ NOT clips. People that call them clips operate out of ignorance which is a very good way for bad things to happen. It is not mere semantics. Its the young man walking around with their pants half pulled down. Its how people get killed by negligent discharges.

      Call it what it is. Otherwise you end up with people like Dacian that actually think AR means Assault Rifle and that changes this nations politics.

    • Mil-Spec = Mostly specified, qualified and designed by a committee or board, not by the Chief Engineer, in most cases these days. Not always the best way to do something.

      • Mil-Spec. May or may not be a good thing. Depends on who wrote the specifications and what their goal was. To produce the best item for the military or to produce the most kickback from a certain government contractor or assure the lowest bidder wins.

    • Quite right. There’s also the distinction between ‘stripper’ clips, as used in a 1903 Springfield, Mausers, etc., and en bloc clips as used in M1 Garands. Box magazines provide for quicker reloads and less abuse of one’s thumb!

      • And isn’t a magazine on a naval vessel simply a storage compartment, i.e.: not technically feeding the gun/s? I might be wrong. It happens.

    • I’ve find it interesting that you have a problem with new provisions of the VAWA.

      From the article you linked to:

      “The first is titled the NICS Denial Notification Act of 2022. This act will require the criminal investigation of all denials on the National Instant Criminal-Background-Check System“

      Why do you want to prohibit the criminal investigation of all denials by NCIS?

      So much for your law and order bullshit, you’d rather prevent prosecution of criminals who attempt to obtain a gun illegally.

      • “Why do you want to prohibit the criminal investigation of all denials by NCIS?”

        As has been documented numerous times, 9 out of 10 times NICS denials are “false positives.” Investigating all of them would result in many, many, more pointless investigations.

        Government NICS bureaucratic moles and lawyers can’t do the job they’re charged with now. Increasing their workload with more pointless bureaucratese and legalese would be a waste of short government resources or require expansion of government bureaucracies by many magnitudes of order.

        • “As has been documented numerous times, 9 out of 10 times NICS denials are “false positives.” Investigating all of them would result in many, many, more pointless investigations.”

          But it’s a job program the Leftist Scum would *love*, an even larger bureaucracy, that might get a one in a thousand conviction rate, proving it’s ‘value’ to the jack-booted thugs of the federal government…

        • Muleskinner,

          “As has been documented numerous times, 9 out of 10 times NICS denials are “false positives.” Investigating all of them would result in many, many, more pointless investigations.”

          With all due respect, Muleskinner, to the useless bureaucrats who populate the ATF, etc.? That’s a feature, not a bug. They can then use that, come budget time, to justify hiring more useless parasites at our expense.

  10. A serious request: Can TTAG have it’s legal contacts look at the implications of VAWA being added to the spending bill that was signed into law today?

    Particularly §925D and how it can be used to make local, state and tribal cops into deputies of the ATF?

    Some LKB-type analysis would be appreciated.

    • I’m (obviously) no LKB, but would it play out the same way as the California municipalities try the same thing with immigration issues?

      • I have no idea because I have no clue what the other relevant statutes are at the federal, state, local or tribal level are.

        Nor do I have any idea what sort of history there is for federal deputization (requirements, limits etc) or what exactly such deputization does.

  11. Regulate

    1. To adjust by rule, method or established mode; as, to regulate weights and measures; to regulate the assize of bread; to regulate our moral conduct by the laws of God and of society; to regulate our manners by the customary forms.
    http://webstersdictionary1828.com › …
    Regulate – Websters 1828 Dictionary

    • So we need to provide basic militia training for all able bodied citizens and allow the full furnishing of arms………..cool.

      • Actually, what we need is a definition for the term used in the 2A and not a convenient dodge ignoring half a phrase and then defining a similar word while taking it out of context.

        This is similar to saying that the “cat’s pajamas” can be defined as “sleepwear” which means a form of clothing expressly meant to be slept in. Which defines a similar word but ends up having fuck-all to do with the actual phrase that was used.

        And, like oddball colloquialisms, background is also helpful.

        • “Actually, what we need is a definition for the term used in the 2A and not a convenient dodge ignoring half a phrase and then defining a similar word while taking it out of context.”

          *Hopefully*, the justice Thomas side of the court will address this in the upcoming ruling on the ‘NY Pistol’ carry case expected by the upcoming June recess.

          (Even more importantly, what the dissent will say. That will likely offer key clues on how they intend to destroy the 2A the next time their side regains control of the SCotUS…)

        • We already have the definition from the time period.

          The phrase “well regulated” meant something that was working as expected or functioning properly. Ship’s clocks (aka, a marine chronometer) were referred to this way, meaning they could be trusted for accurate longitude calculations. There’s basically a whole museum about this topic (nautical clocks and their history) at Greenwich, London. Quite pretty too.

          So, you can be all middle school algebra about this and just insert something for x. “A well regulated militia” = “A properly functioning militia”. Add that into the whole thing and quite obviously it means that the people must be armed so that they can form a functional militia.

          You can play a word game with this too substituting in other things like “hearty breakfast” and see where the “right to bacon and eggs” applies.

          As I’ve pointed out before, from a historical point of view this isn’t that hard to figure out especially if you bother to read anything the people at the time wrote. The entire concept is to decentralize weapons and powder so that a tyrannical government or invading force can’t just seize central armories and deprive the entire area of a means to resist said tyranny/invasion.

          This is the lesson of Lexington & Concord. The British objective was militia supplies (primarily powder) stored in Concord. Instead they found ball, large cannon and food and attempted to destroy what they’d discovered. Mostly they were unsuccessful but the lesson here is not to stockpile everything in a location the enemy can capture in a single blow.

          A search of a local farm (I don’t recall the name off the top of my head), which had been a supply depot, turned up nothing of note. The stuff was clearly moved at some point though it was claimed later that it had been temporarily buried in such a manner as to look like freshly planted crops, which may or may not be true.

          Regardless, the whole debate of the word “regulated” is stupid unless you’re a Leftist.

          You’d think they’d recognize that the exact meaning of phrases changes over time, since it’s a Leftist pastime to change language to suit their purpose. The truth is that they do recognize this, they just don’t want to admit to it. Not because they’re unaware of their own proclivities or the facts but because this particular fact doesn’t line up with their argument.

          Orwell was indisputably correct when he stated “A man may take to drink because he feels himself to he a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts”.

        • strych9,

          Been ringin’ that bell forever, here. Unfortunately, there remains at least the KERNEL of an argument for MinorIQs version – however idiotic and cherry-picking it may be.

          The real answer is that the whole “well regulated Militia” part of the 2A is a prefatory (or explanatory, or explanatory) clause – it does not, in any way, LIMIT the reach of the operative clause, which is “the right of the people (NOTE: “the people”, NOT “the Militia” – kind of any important point) to keep and bear arms shall NOT BE INFRINGED.”

          But we knew the fools arguing this weren’t arguing in good faith. They are grasping at straws, and will glom onto ANY argument, no matter how illogical or feeble, that supports the narrative.

          MinorIQ has been spanked on these issues so often I’ve lost track – and yet the next time the issue comes up, he comes back with the same tired s*** we spanked him on the last time. The ONLY issue I am aware of that he has (seemingly) abandoned is his laughable assertion that Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution authorizes Congress to enact GENERAL gun control. He seems to have been spanked hard enough on that one that he’s given it up.

        • I’m aware of the grammatical deconstruction of the 2A, as it’s been beat to death. (Also, technically speaking a prefatory clause functions as an introduction, not an explanation. A hair they’ll surely split if they actually know much about English sentence construction.)

          The argument here isn’t gramatical, it’s based on diction because the argument was originally advanced along those lines. Therefore in logic and argument those lines of argument are to be addressed first and other counter-points can be added.

          I simply see no point in moving to grammar since the argument died on initial contact with proper definition of the word being discussed. Which is also a great time to point out the Left’s propensity to change the meaning of words to fit whatever their narrative is at the time, which then increases the chances that bystanders will note such deception in the future.

          One of the things that I’ve been hoping people will develop is a sense of pattern recognition. To see how the games and manipulation arrayed formally against the 2A apply to other places as well, and then to look at how those things link back to the 2A. This is the root of why I constantly ask about international shipping. The 2A’s part of a package deal. You won’t get to keep the 2A (or you won’t care that you have) if you lose the rest of the package. Relate this to interlocking fields of fire if you like or “chinks the the armor”. The Left knows that when it comes to the rights they don’t like (all of them) that if they can turn parts of this into a Jenga tower they have an easy job taking out everything. They’ve been working quite hard at this for decades and, alarmingly, neocons, Conservatives and Libertarians have often unwittingly assisted them (well, the neocons knew).

          As for the troll, yes, he constantly returns with exactly the same bullshit. Why do you think I encourage everyone to ignore the trolls?

          Ultimately, arguing with trolls is like wrestling with pigs. You get dirty and the pig likes it. Why play that game? Engaging in that behavior is not saving the comment section, it’s helping the troll destroy the comment section. At the absolute best you’re giving a narcissist what they want. I mean, according to him, you’re essentially amusing him while “his woman makes money” for him.

      • Void
        Did basic training a long time ago but I would like a mk19 for my truck…….Wonder when we can pick that stuff up?

      • Well JWM, whiner is leftarded.

        He will believe ANYTHING if it can advance the agenda. 🤪

        I even let him post his BS TWICE before I replied to it.

        Yeah whiner, TTAG is STILL laughing.
        Well done. 🤣

    • Already busted your chops for this LIE, MinorIQ. If you think repeating your pathetic, illiterate lies makes them more persuasive . . . I would have said “think again”, but that would imply that you thought the first time, which is obviously not true.

      F*** off, you lying, Leftist propagandist. Go join your circle jerk.

    • Why debate the R word? It’s a moot point.

      The closing is CRYSTAL CLEAR……..

      “, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”! 🤔

      • Because the “R word” combined with context tells you why the right shall not be infringed?

        DeWe. Decentralized Weaponry, is the answer.

        • ” doesn’t matter since “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” is a prefatory clause and cannot, under the rules of normal grammar, limit or counteract the OPERATIVE clause of “. . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” ”

          This post by LOD is revelant to my comment.,👍

  13. Sleepy Joe = Arthur Neville Chamberlain. It is no wonder we are in such a mess in this country. If you don’t know who Arthur Neville Chamberlain was, and you don’t Look him up You are part of the problem. For those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it. Yes, I know that is not the way George Santayana put it but, that is what it has morphed into in today’s world

    • So you think Joe Biden is appeasing Putin, as chamberlain appease Hitler?

      Specifically, what would you have Joe Biden do, send American troops into the Ukraine or Russia?

      American airstrikes on Russian military targets in the Ukraine or Russia?

      Or would you have him just cut to the chase, and press the big button?
      Was it Reagan who said, “My fellow Americans, I’m pleased to tell you today that I’ve signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes.”

      • MinorIQ,

        “As has been documented numerous times, 9 out of 10 times NICS denials are “false positives.” Investigating all of them would result in many, many, more pointless investigations.”

        Gee, I thought you Leftist/fascist were ALL ABOUT “nuance” and “sophistication”, yet you posit a binary solution set. Pull your head out of rectal defilade, idiot. There were MANY things Biden COULD have done, before Putin invaded – like not discontinuing Trump’s policy of providing “lethal aid” to Ukraine, putting sanctions on Russia BEFORE they invaded, not allowing Nordstream 2, etc., etc., etc.

        Now that he’s CREATED this clusterf*** (OK, Vlad, you can invade, but only a MINOR incursion – WTF????), Biden and his idiot supporters are now all about “We can’t start WW III!!!”. No shit, Sherlock – but there are a million things you could have done, BEFORE, and you didn’t. There are a million things we could do, now, short of war. Supply more arms to Ukraine (INCLUDING Stingers and Javelins).

        Biden was stupid before he was senile. He has been wrong about every major foreign policy issue since he went to the Senate. His current inept, senile, fumbling, erratic idiocy is simply a continuation of his prior dumb@$$ery, before he became a senile husk.

        F*** off with this nonsense, MajorStupidity, no one is either fooled or persuaded by your f***tardery.

        • Sorry, incorrect quote posted accidentally. The intro quote was intended to be “Specifically, what would you have Joe Biden do, send American troops into the Ukraine or Russia?”

          The rest of the comment I stand by 100%, MinorIQ – you are too stupid to insult.

    • You do old Arthur a grave disservice, sir.

      Biden is far worse. Chamberlain’s actions didn’t essentially doom Britain to being Weimar 2.0. Biden’s basically have done that to the US.

      Ask ol’ Joe about CIPS. Or ask an MSM talking head. I’d be surprised if a single one of them knows what CIPS is without looking it up. But the Crown Prince of Saud knows and that means other people do too. Which ain’t no conspiracy theory since they’ve openly talked about it for years.

      Chamberlain was a fool but he didn’t entirely destroy the Pound. Joe acts like this is his goal for the dollar.

      • Indeed, strych9. It’s even difficult to compare Shotgun Joe to any so called ‘leader’, the man is such a fool. Almost actually feel sorry for him. Our idiot manchild is maybe the closest contemporary comparison, at least in his own… special… way.

  14. When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

  15. “They” seem to think the people the second amendment speaks of are not the same people referenced in the rest of the amendments.
    “They” infringe on all of our rights but the second gets treated differently. It is constantly under un merciful attack. Because “They”know if we let them destroy that right they win.
    I call BULLSHIT !
    And FJB

  16. Geez Louise there a way too many master Fudds on this one! All of you arguing the “well regulated “ statement are morons. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are not, and can never be used as, a limit upon the pre-existing rights of the People. Full stop. They are a limit upon Government only. Every time you buy into this discussion you already lost. Please stop this.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here