Report on the news that matters to your community and don't let us miss a beat. Send in your stories and photos.
My Recent Comments
Funny thing how this is the actual text of the second amendment as retfied by the states.
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.
original proposed draft
But then when one actually reviews history, we see that our founding fathers wrote a perfectly good draft of the second amendment if a collective right was what they wanted.
the right to keep and bear arms
BILL of RIGHTS
(17 TH of 20 amendments)
on display at the Karpeles Manuscript Library
Santa Ana, California
"That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well regulated Militia composed of the body of the people trained to arms is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free State. That standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided as far as the circumstances and protection of the community will admit; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power."
Why didnt the founding fathers just use that clearly written as a collective right eh einstein? Oh thats right, actions do speak louder than words.
Why is it that in the same archival records, we see over 30 references of "well regulated" meaning to be trained in the art of war, from the 1774-1789 Consititual writings and Federalist papers in this same museum?
Have you also removed all the dictionairies that say the same thing? Oh geez, you have not.
Hey maybe in your revisionist history class, you can prove to everyone how the militia existed before the armed individual. That way you can have an arguing point as to how the individual is only armed due to the militia first existing. Darn, good luck with that one einstein.
Maybe we can even have you prove how English scholars and all the courts in the english speaking world have been wrong all these centuries, and now the dependent clause of a complex sentence now determines the meaning of said complex sentence, instead of the independent clause.
See, in a complex sentence, the independent clause, a complete sentence capable of stannding on its own, must first exist in order for the dependent clause to have meaning. We know it sucks that something as simple as english language comprehension gets in the way of your fantasies and lovely spin rhetoric, but being you make your living on words and their meanings, it is astounding you are too stupid to realize this irrefutable fact.
Independent clause "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
Dependent clause "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state"
Get back to us when you have properly refuted the HISTORICAL facts above, but please warn everyone as we will have to dress warm for hades freezing over.Jan 9, 2012