Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dksuddeth
right of the people, not right of the militia. simple wording.
|
It's not simple. I've already addressed this:
"A well regulated Militia" - an organized, armed fighting force
"being necessary to the security of a free State" - not being under government control
"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." - shall not have their guns taken
Martian: Why would the justification be separated so much from the operative? It seems as if it might as well be an asterisk next to "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.", instead of it actually being there. But it is there. If people aren't part of the justification (well regulated militia), then how can it apply to them?
Regardless, your question as to relevance directly challenges the very amendment itself. If the justification no longer is applicable, then the operative becomes incorrect.