Steve CoxKonto zweryfikowane

For the purpose of maintaining a well-regulated militia. Period.

No. The militia is explicitly covered in Article 1, Section 8. Their right to bear arms is in the body of the Constitution. 1/2

So, if the 2nd amendment was to provide for the arming of the militia, it wouldn't have been written in the first place. 2/2

They’d just come through the revolution where their military was the people. The intent re: arms is clear.

I respect you, but you are incorrect here. I've read almost 3 dozen books on the Founders/Founding. They meant to allow the people arms.

For the purpose of militia. At that time weapons were kept locked away in arsenals and access was a huge problem. 2a solved that issue.

Sorry, that's incorrect. The states believed allowing the federal government to run the militias was dangerous, 1/3

so they wanted "the people" to be able to be armed in potential defense from the federal militia. That was the push for the #2A. 2/3