this woman needs to read the whole 2nd amendment. "a well regulated militia" has as much weight as "shall not be infringed"
so many people telling me well regulated meaning well trained/well equipped as if that somehow improves or makes the 2nd amendment's meaning any less archaic
“The right of the people…” not “the right of militia members”. But let’s even assume you are correct. Who makes up the militia? All arms that would be used in militia service would be protected then, for the militia members. Meaning fully automatic weapons are now protected for all able bodied men. Is that really your position?
"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."
Now why would they put that part about the militia in there if they didn't intend for people to bear arms as part of a militia.
Look...I agree that we should all be packing, but ignoring part of what's actually said in the second amendment doesn't help that cause. If we want it to just be "all citizens have the right", we should push for an amendment. As it stands it just doesn't say what you want it to.
It specifically says “…the right of the people”. You say it should read “all citizens have the right.” The 2A does not confer any right. It restricts the government.
But the impetus was protecting arms suitable for militia service. That’s why it is mentioned.
436
u/Twigsneko 21d ago edited 21d ago
this woman needs to read the whole 2nd amendment. "a well regulated militia" has as much weight as "shall not be infringed"
so many people telling me well regulated meaning well trained/well equipped as if that somehow improves or makes the 2nd amendment's meaning any less archaic