Ok that's what I was talking about earlier. Nobody is abusing the amendment. It clearly states the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. You're just arguing the rational. Which, again, even if they said the reason we needed guns was to make swiss cheese, you'd need an amendment to change it.

Frankly I think this is a case where people should just be concise. They should have just left out the militia bit. I don't know, but I'd bet most of them owned guns personally and I am quite confident they wouldn't have approved of having the government disarm everyone.

It's true that it does clearly state that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed, but you are taking it out of context. "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." You just can't leave out part of it and state the second part favorable to you. By "paraphrasing", you are changing the meaning of the text.

It doesn't change the meaning of the right. What you're arguing is the reason, which has nothing to do with the right provided.

Now in arguing the reason you could push for an amendment. However barring an amendment laws that infringe upon the right should be swatted down.

The problem with arguing the 2nd Amendment today is that you have define militia as it was in 1776. Today's definitions range from an unofficial army pressed into service to anyone legally qualified for military service.

The founding fathers fought for days over which words to use in the constitution; if another word of their time had offered a better description, they would have used it. Its the meaning of those words that has changed.

Here's the deal: Many [most] American gun-owners will refuse to relinquish their 2nd Amendment Rights [and guns] regardless of liberal legislation or judicial tyranny.

Ain't gonna happen in my lifetime. I [and others] will shoot any and every cocksucker who tries to take our guns from us. Never underestimate the 'power of the people'......

__________________
“Race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now.” --Barack Obama

Thats EXACTLY the what's wrong. The problem is not necessarily the people on this forum who aren't uneducated savages, but the people who keep their guns in their sock drawers for their children to play with and the people who are willing to "shoot any and every cocksucker".

That is why you have what I call big boy rules.

Don't do anything stupid.

If you go, go big.

And lastly, the most important one. The stupid will be punished.

But as NDs (negligent discharges) are much more infrequent than they once were, it seems that more and more people are becoming educated.

__________________
The National Science Foundation announced the following study results on U.S. military recreation preferences:
1. Sport of choice for Marines: bowling.
2. Sport of choice for Sailors: football.
3. Sport of choice for Soldiers: baseball.
4. Sport of choice for Coast Guardsmen: tennis.
5. Sport of choice for Airmen: golf.
Notice how the farther down the list you go, the smaller their balls get.

There are laws holding parents responsible for crimes committed by their children.

There are also laws holding gun owners responsible for crimes committed with their firearms [under certain circumstances]





Don't misquote me, I was very specific about the cocksuckers I will shoot.

__________________
“Race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now.” --Barack Obama

But punishing people will not necessarily solve the problem. Prevention would. There is a puishment for every crime but those crimes are committed, regardless. If we could STOP the crime before its committed, then the problem is over.

Half the crimes in the US are committed by 13% of the population. Any suggestions?

__________________
“Race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now.” --Barack Obama