SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Lane3 who wrote (230317)12/4/2007 9:26:18 PM
From: ManyMoose10 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) of 793838
 
I don't claim to know what the conjoined sentence means as written.

It means the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. This right existed before the constitution and the constitution does not grant it. Instead, the Bill of Rights protects this and other rights of the people against the government.

The meaning is the same with a comma separating two clauses in a single sentence as written, or a period between two sentences composed of the same or equivalent words.

If the framers wanted it to mean that the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, they would have said that without the need for the second clause.

You may not know this, but during the revolution the militia was composed of people who owned and supplied their own arms. The framers knew this and wanted to make sure the people always had the right to keep and bear arms. Whatever private use the people make of their arms is immaterial to the needs of the militia. If the people have no arms then the militia has no arms either.

You can't have it both ways.

I think the Second Amendment is fine just the way it is written. It's people who want to infringe on the rights it protects who have a problem with it, not me.

Every American must treasure every single right protected under the Bill of Rights. That a precious right should be lost by quibbling over a comma is unthinkable. If one is lost, then another can be lost. Surely this is clear to you.

A double negative being the equivalent of affirmative, in English you can eat at McDonalds' even though a well-regulated kitchen is necessary for the preparation of a fine meal.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News