Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
Not being a member of a well regulated militia, I don't have that right.
|
TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 311Prev | Next § 311. Militia: composition and classes
How Current is This? (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
yes, we do. you included.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
So you're saying some of our nation's great leaders and members of both the House and Senate were "silly" for wording it in a way that you disagree with?
|
no, i said YOU were silly for trying to read it as a militia right instead of a right of the people. plain text and all.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
Actually, the amendment starts out with "A well regulated militia". Maybe you've missed it.
|
not at all. it tells us that a well regulated militia is necessary, therefore our right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. see militia code above.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
This was written when my forefathers were still scattered across Europe and Asia (Russian), so it wasn't referring to me "when this amendment was written". The militia is well regulated. I am not a member of a well regulated militia, you are not a member of a well regulated militia, therefore it's not referring to us.
|
yes it did, yes it does, and yes you most certainly are as well as I am.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
"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."
Whoever wrote this clearly needed a professional editor. (Yes, I've seen the other drafts.) It is unclear phrasing and should not therefore be read literally. It needs historical and cultural context. It needs reinterpretation. It needs changing. It's about time to amend the amendment. It seems open to widespread abuse.
|
yes, some of the most brilliant minds in our history of a nation needed grammar skills.
