Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
no it doesnt have to follow the first part....they could have just left it at this...."A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,shall not be infringed"....but they did not do that did they?....did you know, that nobody should Ever take the right wing seriously about the law or economics?yes it does.....so who are the "people" in the second part?...."the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"It specifically applies to well regulated militia, not the unorganized militia.well yea it does.....people have owned guns since day one here.....you just wont agree joe because you are an anti gun person.....so of course to people with your mindset the second amendment only applies to an organized militia....its been that way since around 1791......
Well, no, it hasn't. In fact, for most of our history, the courts have ruled that cities and states have the right to make gun laws because of the whole "Well-regulated Militia" thing.
the second clause of our second amendment, is simply that, a clause; it is Not, a Constitution unto itself. it is merely a second clause that must follow the first clause, of our Second Article of Amendment.
The Militia of the United States.how come every time i ask you anti gun people who the people are in the second half of that amendment,i get a run around answer?....daniel...who are the PEOPLE mentioned in the second half?...did you know, that nobody should Ever take the right wing seriously about the law or economics?yes it does.....so who are the "people" in the second part?...."the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"It specifically applies to well regulated militia, not the unorganized militia.well yea it does.....people have owned guns since day one here.....you just wont agree joe because you are an anti gun person.....so of course to people with your mindset the second amendment only applies to an organized militia....Well, no, it hasn't. In fact, for most of our history, the courts have ruled that cities and states have the right to make gun laws because of the whole "Well-regulated Militia" thing.
the second clause of our second amendment, is simply that, a clause; it is Not, a Constitution unto itself. it is merely a second clause that must follow the first clause, of our Second Article of Amendment.
then why did they not say militia?....the definitions are different.....The Militia of the United States.how come every time i ask you anti gun people who the people are in the second half of that amendment,i get a run around answer?....daniel...who are the PEOPLE mentioned in the second half?...did you know, that nobody should Ever take the right wing seriously about the law or economics?yes it does.....so who are the "people" in the second part?...."the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"It specifically applies to well regulated militia, not the unorganized militia.well yea it does.....people have owned guns since day one here.....you just wont agree joe because you are an anti gun person.....so of course to people with your mindset the second amendment only applies to an organized militia....
the second clause of our second amendment, is simply that, a clause; it is Not, a Constitution unto itself. it is merely a second clause that must follow the first clause, of our Second Article of Amendment.
Yeah, actually, he was. In fact, the problem was, the CIA preferred to deal with Arab volunteers over Afghan Tribesmen, mostly because their motivations were easier to understand. They were Muslims who wanted to kill infidels, as opposed to the Tribesmen who had their own agendas and rivalries and might support the Soviets one week and the Muhajadeen the next.
Now you know why I don't take the right wing seriously regarding the law or economics. The People are the Milita.then why did they not say militia?....the definitions are different.....The Militia of the United States.how come every time i ask you anti gun people who the people are in the second half of that amendment,i get a run around answer?....daniel...who are the PEOPLE mentioned in the second half?...did you know, that nobody should Ever take the right wing seriously about the law or economics?yes it does.....so who are the "people" in the second part?...."the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"It specifically applies to well regulated militia, not the unorganized militia.
the second clause of our second amendment, is simply that, a clause; it is Not, a Constitution unto itself. it is merely a second clause that must follow the first clause, of our Second Article of Amendment.
.
PEOPLE:the men, women, and children of a particular nation, community, or ethnic group.
MILITIA:a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.....now who are those people?....
ok lets take that....then we have the right to own guns.....thank you....Now you know why I don't take the right wing seriously regarding the law or economics. The People are the Milita.then why did they not say militia?....the definitions are different.....The Militia of the United States.how come every time i ask you anti gun people who the people are in the second half of that amendment,i get a run around answer?....daniel...who are the PEOPLE mentioned in the second half?...did you know, that nobody should Ever take the right wing seriously about the law or economics?yes it does.....so who are the "people" in the second part?...."the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"
the second clause of our second amendment, is simply that, a clause; it is Not, a Constitution unto itself. it is merely a second clause that must follow the first clause, of our Second Article of Amendment.
.
PEOPLE:the men, women, and children of a particular nation, community, or ethnic group.
MILITIA:a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.....now who are those people?....
Nobody said you didn't. Self-defense is a natural right. The social dilemma, is that well regulated militia for the security of a free State, is a States' right.ok lets take that....then we have the right to own guns.....thank you....Now you know why I don't take the right wing seriously regarding the law or economics. The People are the Milita.then why did they not say militia?....the definitions are different.....The Militia of the United States.how come every time i ask you anti gun people who the people are in the second half of that amendment,i get a run around answer?....daniel...who are the PEOPLE mentioned in the second half?...did you know, that nobody should Ever take the right wing seriously about the law or economics?
the second clause of our second amendment, is simply that, a clause; it is Not, a Constitution unto itself. it is merely a second clause that must follow the first clause, of our Second Article of Amendment.
.
PEOPLE:the men, women, and children of a particular nation, community, or ethnic group.
MILITIA:a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.....now who are those people?....
and..."the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"....is the citizens/peoples right...Nobody said you didn't. Self-defense is a natural right. The social dilemma, is that well regulated militia for the security of a free State, is a States' right.ok lets take that....then we have the right to own guns.....thank you....Now you know why I don't take the right wing seriously regarding the law or economics. The People are the Milita.then why did they not say militia?....the definitions are different.....The Militia of the United States.how come every time i ask you anti gun people who the people are in the second half of that amendment,i get a run around answer?....daniel...who are the PEOPLE mentioned in the second half?...
.
PEOPLE:the men, women, and children of a particular nation, community, or ethnic group.
MILITIA:a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.....now who are those people?....
The second clause merely follows and Must Obey the context of the First Clause.and..."the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"....is the citizens/peoples right...Nobody said you didn't. Self-defense is a natural right. The social dilemma, is that well regulated militia for the security of a free State, is a States' right.ok lets take that....then we have the right to own guns.....thank you....Now you know why I don't take the right wing seriously regarding the law or economics. The People are the Milita.then why did they not say militia?....the definitions are different.....The Militia of the United States.
.
PEOPLE:the men, women, and children of a particular nation, community, or ethnic group.
MILITIA:a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.....now who are those people?....
no it does not have to follow....there is a difference between a "militia" and "the people".....they could have just kept the first part....but for some strange reason they added the second part and used the word "people" instead of "militia".....why?....The second clause merely follows and Must Obey the context of the First Clause.and..."the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"....is the citizens/peoples right...Nobody said you didn't. Self-defense is a natural right. The social dilemma, is that well regulated militia for the security of a free State, is a States' right.ok lets take that....then we have the right to own guns.....thank you....Now you know why I don't take the right wing seriously regarding the law or economics. The People are the Milita.then why did they not say militia?....the definitions are different.....
.
PEOPLE:the men, women, and children of a particular nation, community, or ethnic group.
MILITIA:a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.....now who are those people?....
Yes, it does; simply Because, It would have to be, "infidel, protestant, and renegade, to our federal Constitution and supreme law of the land, and Become, a Constitution(al Clause Unto Itself instead of a Constitution.)no it does not have to follow....there is a difference between a "militia" and "the people".....they could have just kept the first part....but for some strange reason they added the second part and used the word "people" instead of "militia".....why?....The second clause merely follows and Must Obey the context of the First Clause.and..."the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"....is the citizens/peoples right...Nobody said you didn't. Self-defense is a natural right. The social dilemma, is that well regulated militia for the security of a free State, is a States' right.ok lets take that....then we have the right to own guns.....thank you....Now you know why I don't take the right wing seriously regarding the law or economics. The People are the Milita.
