View Single Post
  #24   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
James[_7_] James[_7_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 33
Default Can you ID these headphones?

On Thursday, December 26, 2019 at 8:31:19 PM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
James wrote:


It's not just to preserve the ability to form a militia. When the 2A was wr=
itten firearm ownership was ubiquitous. People used them for hunting for fo=
od and for recreation, for self-defense. I.e. basically the same reasons th=
ey own them today. Sure, resistance against tyranny was also part of it - t=
he British made efforts to confiscate arms and ammunition to maintain contr=
ol over the population. Dictatorships are famous for confiscating firearms.=


It doesn't actually say that, though. What it says is that because citizens
have a right to resist, therefore they have an inherent right to have arms.



Yup, they have a right to resist unlawful force - whether it's the gov't overstepping their bounds or someone breaking into your home or trying to attack you on the street.



All of that stuff about hunting, recreation, and self defense isn't actually
written on the paper.



It doesn't need to be. It's already been established that it doesn't restrict firearm possession to participating in a gov't militia. You've acknowledged the point that people have the right to resist - the gov't confiscating firearms deprived people of a capacity to obtain food, to defend themselves.

Ergo "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.