Absence of a well regulated militia

The placement of the commas make that amendment utterly unreadable. Even to Constitutional Lawyers. Also changes in language.

I dont understand how Nebraska seems to be the only state that bans all felons from ever owning a gun...and people think the midwest is stupid...I thought it was like that in every state, but im starting to realize the stupidity of other states by reading things like this. To be clear, Nebraska does in fact ban felons from owning a firearm ever again, only through extreme effort and appeal after appeal can a felon be brought back to be re evaluated and possibly gain gun rights back, but I have never ever heard of that happening.

bbosh - I would hope you do some research and put more thought into this. It sounds as though you have done neither. To attack a basic human right because people have been killed and had a felonous background proves it beyond any doubt.

I have close to two dozen of those murderous implements and just like 99%+ of other gun owners, no one will be shot.

"The definition of a militia and the regulated part needs some serious amending." - It has. Everywhere. The state of Texas with rather lax gun laws has over 450,000 gun laws on the books.

You gotta do better than this post.

Except it's never been amended beyond. It's been ignored where stupid, but that's entirely different from amending it.

The only reason a state (like say Nebraska) could take away your right to a gun regardless of any crime is to argue that States can ignore the Constitution if they so choose (which has been struck down in the past) otherwise they don't legally have a leg to stand on.

@beyond, a basic human right? That's a weird statement.

Let's be honest, no one has any idea what the second amendment is supposed to mean.

We've been over this ad nauseam, though I do like to talk about it.

I'm just going to say that the right to protect oneself and family with the use of deadly force is a basic human right. If pushed, I might also include sport, recreation, hobby, and a buffer against tyranny realizing that last one is reaching longer than my arms can, regardless of what Thomas Jefferson said.

I am completely beyond understanding why people insist disarming a country is the answer to their problems.

As to the 2nd amendment, perhaps the wording (or lack of it) was intentional. I have never cared for the wording, but it has worked so far. I still have my guns. My home is still protected. I can carry a loaded gun while traveling. And when I get there I can go to a range and shoot with friends until I run out of money for ammo.

Screw the people who wish to take any of that away from me.

AMEN

Why is it more of a human right to defend yourself with deadly force than to not be in the situation in the first place? Given a choice between having a gun and knowing the other guy DOESN'T have a gun I'll choose the latter in heart beat.

But you can't know that sean, even if guns were made completly illegal in the united states and our police man ran around waving batons, the criminals would still have guns...just like marijuana is illegal, but I can think of 15 people within a mile of me that are smokin.

"I'm just going to say that the right to protect oneself and family with the use of deadly force is a basic human right. "

Can I own a nuke? Missiles?

"I am completely beyond understanding why people insist disarming a country is the answer to their problems."

You're projecting. I haven't said this, and mgi didn't say this. What I said is that no one has any idea what the 2nd amendment is supposed to mean, especially in the modern world.

"As to the 2nd amendment, perhaps the wording (or lack of it) was intentional. I have never cared for the wording, but it has worked so far. "

We ignore the wording, it hasn't "worked". For example, it doesn't say "guns" it says "arms". Missiles are arms, but you can't own them. Bombs are arms, but you can't own them, etc, etc.

"Screw the people who wish to take any of that away from me."

You are seeing ghosts where they don't exist. Where did I or anyone here say that they don't want you to have a gun?

Oh here we go with the nukes, haha...

I can be very damn certain. Criminals don't make their own guns, they purchase them. The fact that we see very little gun violence in countries with strict gun laws backs this. The fact that we see close to no auto (such as uzis) in the states after they were banned is proof of this. The fact that we never hear about grenades being used is proof of this and these are all highly concealable and light weight weapons. Criminals aren't magicians.

Hell half the reason they arm themselves before robbing us is because they are afraid YOU have a gun.

Weed is different for a number of reasons. For starters you do actually grow weed. Most people have no problem with weed either, it's illegal to download music and I'd be harder pressed to find someone I know who DOESN'T than to point out the people who do. Still not really the point.

You can keep your guns, just like I'll keep mine. I'm fully aware however that the philosophy of gun holders is one where they are afraid the boogeyman is gonna kick in their door and it's gonna be just like in the movies where they are in the middle of dinner and reach into the silverware drawer (cus they burglar couldn't possibly be BETWEEN you and the weapon even 50% of the time or the philosophy would be carry at all times not just own) and pop two in his chest and finish dinner while waiting for the cops.

The nukes are perfectly valid. As is mustard gas. You don't get to pick and choose when the Constituion is just a peice of paper and when it isn't. At least not without flat out admitting that is your philosophy.

Who told you that militias are illegal? The National Guard are federally-regulated militias, while State Defense Forces are state-regulated militias.

The UK has outlawed handguns but not rifles or shotguns. Gun deaths still happen there, as criminals who do not respect the law are buying illegal ones or improvising their own, just as criminals here do. Or they take advantage of a legal loophole regarding gun shows. And now the Brits have outlawed knives because of the increase in knife violence. Taking away weapons apparently does nothing to make anyone safer.