[editor-surveyor]

"I'm commenting that the President has the duty to defend the 2nd Amendment from actions like those taken in New Orleans."

Perhaps you didn't read the code sections that CO posted carefully enough. Those sections allow the Gov. of La. to demand that the president crush the rebellion that she is fomenting. Understand? The meaning is opposite of what you were assuming.

[dimquest]

I'm commenting that the President has the duty to defend the 2nd Amendment from actions like those taken in New Orleans. New Orleans officials should be told by State & Fed officials that they are violating the 2nd.

Perhaps you didn't read the code sections that CO posted carefully enough. Those sections allow the Gov. of La. to demand that the president crush the rebellion that she is fomenting. Understand? The meaning is opposite of what you were assuming.

What can I say to assure you that I am not making any such "opposite" assumption?