The answer is *not* 'arm the students'

The "context" is that both a well regulated militia and the right to bear arms are what keep a people free and secure.

The context is not that the right to bear arms is only by militia.

 

And which part is to be well regulated? The militia or the right to bear arms? Let's use some common sense here.

 

I never saw a handgun bounce around and shoot anyone...you? That meme is silly...inanimate objects cannot kill anyone. A person kills another person.

 

We've all seen how the British Empire preferred unarmed colonials. And we've all seen how they were mowed down like grass in Amritsar.

We aren't subjects over here we're citizens.

 

It's not a straw man.

Guns, bow and arrow, slings and various other types of armory were and are used to provide food for the table.

Even today in parts of the US the citizenry depends on hunting to feed themselves.

Not only that they use their guns to snipe the critters like woodchucks (which can also be eaten) who raid their gardens.

Also, is there arson in Great Britain? Are matches and lighters outlawed?

While an armed citizenry may not be "the" answer it is "an" answer against the tyranny of both foreign and domestic terrorists and tyrants.

It is the one our founding fathers chose as part of our defense.

True, as a consequence, we are a violent society.

However, folks will still risk life and limb to get into these United States.

HankD

 

I posted what they say. You saw it, your presuppositions will lead you where ever you want to go.

 

You are the one who is missing the clear intentions of this language. In military terms, one often speaks of regulations in terms of that which is needed to bring it up to an acceptable standard. Because it is self-evident that a free people should be able to defend their freedom and because arms are needed for that end, Government cannot infringe on the people's right to own and bear arms.

In other words, your liberal nature shows when you start thinking of regulations only in terms of laws that can be pressed upon people.

 

The Irish are 'citizens not subjects' as well. Handguns are illegal. Rifles and shotguns are severely restricted. The general 'cop on the beat' is unarmed.

And yet gun crime, outside of drug gang wars, is virtually unheard of. Most of those times it is a case of mistaken identity.

I haven't lost a minute's sleep in the 18 years I have been here because I don't have a gun under my pillow.

I believe in the 2nd Amendment. I do think there needs to be some reform so that there is not unrestricted access to any weapon.

My point is that people can live safely and happily in a 'gun free' society.

 

Didn't think you would be "impressed". :laugh:

http://gunowners.org/sk0703.htm

Wish I could quote the entire article, since instead of discussing the points it covered, you declared it is a "mish-mash" and you're not impressed.

Thank you for not being impressed. That's led me to do more digging about England's stance & statistics. :flower:

Gun Control's Twisted Outcome
Restricting firearms has helped make England more crime-ridden than the U.S.
http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/01/gun-controls-twisted-outcome/2