What's so hard to understand about "well-regulated militia?"

The entire conversation has descended into pointless, irrelevant idiocy anyway. Might as well just listen to Weird Al.

[media=https://youtu.be/t4cDUp61PNI]

Top | Newest First | Oldest First

Muthafukajones · 46-50, M

The intention was that if everyone had a gun then the state would have the entire population available for its defensive in case of a foreign invasion. It is likely that well regulated militia infers a similar type of right enjoyed in Canada to bear arms. In Canada anyone can have a gun as freely as one might have a driver’s licence. There are rules in place that prevent some from having guns and other rules that take alway the privilege of gun ownership for those who abuse it. Doesn’t that seem more reasonable and the likely intent of the framers of the constitution of the United States?

sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M

".... the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

View 7 more replies »

NorthernBear · 51-55, M

@Slade The Supreme Court justices who have consistently ruled that the national guard fulfills the requirements of the second amendment? Yeah, I'm the one claiming to know more than they. You're the one parroting what they have consistently said. And fire is ice cold.

sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M

@NorthernBear Anything else you wanna cherry-pick?

"..., the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

MasterLee · 56-60, M

Nothing. The well regulated militia is the American citizenry.

sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M

@MasterLee

Eklipse · F

You'll get bored by AI. They blunder and repeat often.

Add a comment...