Replies

"Let's face it, a militia is not a standing army and can be a group of neighbors banding together and organizing for the purpose of neighborhood or local defense from foreign or domestic."

True. That is a militia. But the second amendment refers to a "well regulated state Militia" and the U.S. Constitution says that officers are to be appointed by the state.

Your militia would, therefore, not enjoy second amendment protection.

But the second amendment refers to a "well regulated state Militia" and the U.S. Constitution says that officers are to be appointed by the state.

Please read the Amendment. It does not read "state Militia".

It only reads "a well regulated Militia" and my neighbors and I are quite capable of being "well regulated" without the state.

True. That is a militia. But the second amendment refers to a "well regulated state Militia" and the U.S. Constitution says that officers are to be appointed by the state.

I see your still glossing over the unorganized militia again in the composition descriptions.

But the second amendment refers to a "well regulated state Militia" and the U.S. Constitution says that officers are to be appointed by the state.

Liar.

The Second Amendment at no point refers to any descriptor identifying what militia is being discussed in the preamble.

Further, and more important, even Liberal legal scholars, Lawrence Tribe chief among them, have conceded that when the document was drafted, the militia was everyone who was capable of bearing arms and were expected to report with their own weapons.

The same scholars point out that any other interpretation of the word "people" in the second amendment is impossible given the basic precepts of constitutional interpretation. (you can't or won't understand them, so I'm not going to bother explaining them to you)

Get off your militia kick, and just admit you don't like anyone owning guns unless your Federal Goverment gives them permission to do so.

I have said it before, you are either a moron or a shill for big government, anti-individual rights groups.

the Second amendment refers to a "well regulated state Militia"

Ah, the crux of the problem. You seem to have a different copy of the Bill Of Rights than everyone else here. Our copy does not say "well regulated state Militia", it says "well regulated Militia" and then goes on to indicate how that's something good for a State, which does not in any way indicate that the State is the topmost controlling authority of the Militia being referred to.

But the second amendment refers to a "well regulated state Militia"

No it doesn't. It doesn't mention state militias at all. It only says that a well-regulated militia (specifying neither local, state, nor national) is necessary to the security of a free state.

Because militias are necessary for such freedom, the right of the people to keep and bear arms isn't to be infringed (so that the people will be able to form a militia if necessary).

You seem to lack even a child's ability to parse simple English. Assuming that you are still in grade school, you should probably try to concentrate more on your education instead of wasting peoples' time by posting such silly assertions.