View Single Post
Old April 28, 2009, 10:30 PM   #75
Al Norris
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,549
Originally Posted by honkylips View Post
They way I read it, I always take it to mean that the public has the right to keep/bear arms for the purpose of maintaining the aforementioned 'well regulated militia'.

Can somebody explain the significance of this part of the amendment. It's always kinda made me wonder. Like I said, the wording of amendment, to me, never translates to the right to keep/bear arms for all individual citizens.
When looking back at the questions asked in the OP, I see that we have strayed very far afield.

I hazard to say that the question has been answered.

The current diversion over a clause that is now disconnected from the individual right to keep and bear arms is nothing more than venting, because some want to make the militia more important than it has been in over a hundred years.

Remember, the prefatory clause stated a reason to enumerate a right of the people. The clause did not state all the reasons, anymore than the BOR enumerates all of our rights (Hamiltons fear).
Al Norris is offline  
Page generated in 0.03355 seconds with 7 queries