The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "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."
It is plain annoying how everybody misses the god damn part that read "A WELL REGULATED MILITIA" as if it were somehow not to apply to the "rights".
In other words:
You have a right to bear arms as long as you are well regulated!!!
Read the whole god damned second amendment not just the part you like, but the part that makes it an amendment in the first place, a REGULATED right!.
For the uninitiated, so you understand, again: "A well regulated Militia... "
10
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
7 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.It also states there should be no standing army, so maintaining garrisons is also unconstitutional. Can't have your cake and eat it too eg one or the other; either maintain a standing army or maintain state militia's. Having both makes a mockery of the constitution, not that any American cares it gets watered down by the day..
The American constitution is not worth the (hemp) paper it is written on in 2023. Totally ignored by those in power.
puff
Level 8
Apr 25, 2023
0
Hm-mm, who here are so angry that they read the amendment as if it’s written differently?
It’s not written “A militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the well regulated right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."
Nor is it written “A militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear well regulated Arms shall not be infringed."
Turn your anger’s energy to amending the Amendment. Give democracy a try.
yvilletom
Level 8
Apr 22, 2023
0
Yes, the militia should be well regulated when armed citizens unite to combat the governmental terrorist of the European invadors since their freedom from England July 4th, 1776 to rape this land from the original indigenous inhabitants calling them such as Mexicans, indian and native American.
Word
Level 8
Apr 21, 2023
0
There's no such thing as an unfettered right, the idea that any gun regulation is somehow taking away people's rights is ridiculous. There's tons that could be done to reduce gun violence without taking away any law abiding citizen's rights. Not in America though.
Druvius
Level 8
Apr 21, 2023
4
@TheInterlooper Civil forfeiture. You didn't really think this through, did you? And what does the 5th amendment have to do with the second amendment?
They want to protect children from Drag Queens but not from guns. If they could make large profits and gain benefits off Drag Queens then they would be under the governments protection.
The moral of the story...Your life is worthless to the government unless you are wealthy or you can provide politicians with benefits. Otherwise, work your buns off while the government keeps increasing their cut.
Betty
Level 8
Apr 21, 2023
3
The government is merely an extension of the people. Government is necessary to organize 330 million people. Taxation is what allows us to do so and the cost of doing so increases just like anything else. This is the richest country in the history of the world and includes almost 1000 billionaires and around 22 million millionaires so taxation is not hurting wealthy Americans, that's for sure.
The gun problem is not the fault of the government, the gun problem is the fault of ammosexuals and their unnatural attachment to firearms that regards their right to bear arms as more important than the lives of all other Americans. They want to preserve their right to bear arms in order to mount a resistance to their own government should they decide it's in their interest to do so. They are domestic terrorists of the first order and as such the Second Amendment has outlived its usefulness. Ultimately government is the tool we are going to have to use to quash this problem, IF we are ever able to quash this problem.
@LovinLarge Without the government's support and if gun lobbyists were not permitted to offer incentives then regulations would already be in place to prevent many military-style guns from being available to those with criminal, mental, and behavioral problems. Regulations on gun manufacturers could limit what they sell to the public.
@Betty It will be the government that puts those things in place when they are able to overcome the resistance. Change is almost always incremental. Just this week we had a Republican governor calling for gun control. This is almost unheard of. When their own families are adversely affected, they tend to begin to change their tune. Hopefully it is a beginning but I'm not holding my breath.
@LovinLarge Change will come but not before many more will die, and that is a very sad state of affairs. 
The NRA, the Rethuglicans and every other delusional idiot in the United $tates of Absurdity always repudiate the notion of a "well regulated militia".
anglophone
Level 9
Apr 21, 2023
4
Despite which, SCOTUS is trying to bend the interpretation to suit the NRA
Petter
Level 9
Apr 21, 2023
4
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the National Rifle Association of America.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.