RaspberrySurprise
Member
I was about to go to sleep and something crossed my mind. If you were to believe that the second amendment only guarantees a right to bear arms if you are part of a militia would the amendment not contradict itself?
If "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" then wouldn't a requirement of militia service be an infringement mandated by the amendment itself? It's like saying some people are more equal than others!
Now I know that such mental gymnastics have no point really since it has been ruled that militia service is not a requirement for the keeping of arms, but I couldn't get it out of my head.
If "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" then wouldn't a requirement of militia service be an infringement mandated by the amendment itself? It's like saying some people are more equal than others!
Now I know that such mental gymnastics have no point really since it has been ruled that militia service is not a requirement for the keeping of arms, but I couldn't get it out of my head.