A few thoughts addressed to those who believe disarming their fellow citizens is a good thing, and that it will make America a better, safer , society. (1st of 2 or more posting - number 2 will come in a few days)
1.) First , let me simply tell you that the founders of this nation, realizing the importance of the citizens right to keep and bear arms, expressed this by creating the second amendment in the bill of rights. The historical facts bare out the full intent of those who drafted this document, to express all of the contents of this bill of rights, as being individual rights, that applied to each and every citizen.
For those of you who keep trying to muddy the words used in the 2nd amendment to mean something other than individual rights, you should realize that more than one congressional study has been done on this subject, and have come to the same conclusion. (it is and indivdual right)
And yet, here we are today, some still arguing over the mention of militia (given as one of the reasons for this right to keep and bear arms) as meaning a collective military right rather than an individual one. It is unimaginable to me that the drafters of this document, intelligent as they have proved to be, would somehow think it important to express that the military of the United States should have the right to keep and bear arms, as if someone came up with the thought that they should be unarmed ?
You may not like the fact that the second amendment exists . But it does, and it means what it says. People/citizens have the constitutional, individual right to keep and bear arms, without infringment. If you are against that right, it is your right to try to change it through a change in the constitution. I would work against you in that effort, but I would at least have more respect for you if your efforts were straight forward rather than covered in the deceit that is so commonplace regarding this issue.
1.) First , let me simply tell you that the founders of this nation, realizing the importance of the citizens right to keep and bear arms, expressed this by creating the second amendment in the bill of rights. The historical facts bare out the full intent of those who drafted this document, to express all of the contents of this bill of rights, as being individual rights, that applied to each and every citizen.
For those of you who keep trying to muddy the words used in the 2nd amendment to mean something other than individual rights, you should realize that more than one congressional study has been done on this subject, and have come to the same conclusion. (it is and indivdual right)
And yet, here we are today, some still arguing over the mention of militia (given as one of the reasons for this right to keep and bear arms) as meaning a collective military right rather than an individual one. It is unimaginable to me that the drafters of this document, intelligent as they have proved to be, would somehow think it important to express that the military of the United States should have the right to keep and bear arms, as if someone came up with the thought that they should be unarmed ?
You may not like the fact that the second amendment exists . But it does, and it means what it says. People/citizens have the constitutional, individual right to keep and bear arms, without infringment. If you are against that right, it is your right to try to change it through a change in the constitution. I would work against you in that effort, but I would at least have more respect for you if your efforts were straight forward rather than covered in the deceit that is so commonplace regarding this issue.
