Maybe they have a militia.
Maybe they have a militia.
Maybe Obama armed them.
Agree. Derp making it about militias was total ding.
Derp pretending he’s not derp is delicious.
Yea. ing Derp aka Chump.
militias are part of the 2nd amendment
So do you think that Americans don't have a right to bear arms unless they are part of a militia?
you're derp and you're making it about Obama... ding
no, that's not my opinion nor has it been how SCOTUS has ever interpreted it.
i do think the well-regulated militia clause does grant regulatory power
Well, that's what sperm shielding Derp is getting at; that it's based on militia rights.
it is based on militia rights. the first clause of 2A was not a throwaway line meant to be stylistic
because otherwise the militia isnt well regulated
Sure, it wasn't. It was meant to state that the people right to self protection via arms.
And it states that this right shall not be infringed. "Regulation" is an infringement.
That's philo stuff. You can't have a well regulated militia if the right to bare arms is infringed. That's simple stuff. We don't want them being reduced to rocks and sticks.
if 2A was just meant to say that they cant regulate the private ownership of guns, then it would just say that, instead of leading with the line about a well regulated militia
i dont think the well regulated militia line represented just an optional piece of advice for the people
It does say that, quite bluntly. The right SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
are the people defending the 2nd amendment agreeing with allowing citizens to own nuclear weapons? If not why?
Nazi's!!!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)