Replies

There's room for opposing opinions. But you don't get to have your own set of facts.

I was not imposing my own facts, specifically pointing out that this was opinion. My belief is that the militia is everyone able to bear arms. Further, I believe that the 2dA contains two clauses, one that protects the militia from government infringement, and a second that protects the RKBA from government infringment. I also believe the government has gone to great lengths to infringe upon both of those rights.

I concur that your opinion of the 2dA is far more broad than my interpretation, but neither of which are supportive of government restriction. I am simply of the opinion that the FF's designed the 2dA to protect the most sustainable form of weaponry available to the common man. Whether they envisioned WMDs or not is beyond the scope of our discussion, but an interesting one none the less.

Finally, please forgive my screed of the previous post. I interpreted your comments as an insult where one may not have existed. For that, I apologize.

rjsimmon said: "Finally, please forgive my screed of the previous post."

Okay.

How about some support for the distinction you draw between "ordnance" and "arms"? How do you determine that the first is not a proper subset of the second?

Can you provide anything prior to, say, 1850 that supports such a distinction? The "shot heard round the world" was fired in Massachusetts in April of 1775. The Regular Army of their own government was sent to confiscate what I would call "arms" in Concord that were in the possession of those opposed to that government's actions.

Each and every colonist who opposed that confiscation put their lives on the line to oppose what the government thought was a legitimate function of government. These colonists certainly acted as if they had a right to possess what the government was trying to confiscate.

Ok, here's a question: how are you defining 'ordnance', and how would your definition not be covered under 'arms'? If we head to some dictionaries, here's the definitions I find:

Ordnance
1 a : military supplies including weapons, ammunition, combat vehicles, and maintenance tools and equipment
1 b : a service of the army charged with the procuring, distributing, and safekeeping of ordnance
2 : cannon, artillery

Arms
1. weapons and ammunition; armaments.

So, nothing I see in there places arms and ordnance as exclusive to each other.