schneiderguy
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2006
- 10,765
- 52
- 91
yes it does
Yeah the 17th definition :hmm:
If they meant "bear" to mean "to possess", then why did they put "keep" also?
yes it does
Yeah the 17th definition :hmm:
If they meant "bear" to mean "to possess", then why did they put "keep" also?
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.
i've read it argued too that the part people keep missing, the "A well regulated militia being necessary " part, indicated that they intended for this to be applicable for people to be able to possess arms as part of a militia... Not for people to wander the streets with a gun, but to have it as part of their militia duty.. incase they're called for duty.. and not have to run to an armory to get their weapon first.
The intent of it doesn't matter, it doesn't say "the right to keep and bear arms for a violent revolution". It just says, "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" and somehow people take this to mean "YOU CAN'T HAVE GUNS" :hmm:
you can possess something temporarily.
i've read it argued too that the part people keep missing, the "A well regulated militia being necessary " part, indicated that they intended for this to be applicable for people to be able to possess arms as part of a militia... Not for people to wander the streets with a gun, but to have it as part of their militia duty.. incase they're called for duty.. and not have to run to an armory to get their weapon first.
No, just for the simple fact it will increase costs and will do nothing to keep them out of thugs hands. No tin foil hat, there just isn't any need to do it.
Cars are tracked, and i don't hear any rumblings about them taking away cars.
