[Magdalen] right to bear arms

[Roger Stokes]

On 11/12/2015 23:07, M J _Mike_ Logsdon wrote:
> I've been wondering why, all during these decades of gun control 
> debate, no one, NO ONE, in authority on any level has made a really 
> huge deal about how the 2nd Amendment speaks NOTHING to the right of 
> individuals NOT in relation to a well-regulated militia to own 
> firearms freely and without restriction. Since what I just said is, in 
> fact, the case in plain Constitutional English, I say the gov't SHOULD 
> take away everyone's guns. I suppose that would start a 
> sword-purchasing epidemic, though. 

There is the problem of the missing comma.  I believe what was passed by 
Congress was "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."  The phrase "being necessary to the security of a 
free state" then becomes a condition for what follows.  Unfortunately 
the first comma was omitted in what was ratified by the states and 
authenticated by Jefferson to be the actual amendment to the 
Constitution.  While many of us would agree that this phrase is the 
rationale for the amendment the Supreme Court looked at what had been 
authenticated and it was no longer to be regarded as a conditional and 
restrictive phrase.

Roger