it said such was necessary but did not make the two mutually exclusive it just stated it as a fact, and that the rights of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed, it didn't say or imply that you had to be part of a militia to keep arms just that a militia was necessary.
It was created because professional military was frowned upon, and still is to this day. It was part of a check system. Why are you arguing this subject may I ask? You have absolutely no evidence to support your theory and a ton to discredit it. You're much better off on global warming, because it cant be proven.
You must never venture outside whether cloudy or not. Lightning can get you, ya know.
i just spoke with much of my family tonight regarding this. The 2nd Amendment was put in place to prevent a tyranical government from oppressing it's people therefore, if it's available to the police/military and i can afford not only the purchase of it but the maintenance, use, and servicing of it, i should be allowed to own it since i have in absolutely no way proven to be dangerous nor a threat.
every right is abridged. your right to free speech is not without certain non-protected forms of speech, just like your right to own arms is not without certain abridgements.
man doesn't manufacture lightning. man does manufacture guns.You must never venture outside whether cloudy or not. Lightning can get you, ya know.
Absofuckinglutely, goddamn right. You'll never hear this on MSM. It's always, "why do you need an assault rifle to murder Bambi?"
pretty much what i believe on the issue. and i think the police would be better off being non-armed like in other nations. the rest of that calculus is up to you.
since the inception of america:
When you say your rights are abridged,
yeah, what's wrong with you, just accept your overlords, stfu and give them all your property because they own you.
And your point is? i am willing to put out there that more people are killed yearly, worldwide, through lightning strikes than accidental discharges. i'll go one step further and say it is probably equal or less likely to be shot by a truly accidentally fired round than struck by lightning.
Thing is, they aren't unarmed. They may not have arms on them on routine patrol but do you really think it takes more than a phone call or radio call to have firearms there within minutes? The 2nd amendment would say i have the right to the same.
Hundreds of thousands? Naw bro. Don't believe it. Show me a link please.
Well??????
LOL, Bucky is like that Energizer bunny, he just keeps coming back for more. No matter how many times he ducks an argument he knows he can't win.
Not that I think the constitution automatically encompasses everyone, but I think you meant to say " a right promised to be protected by the constitution. " ....As you are probably aware rights do not come from the government, they can't and don't bestow them, they can only protect them (or more liklely not) or take them away.
[video=youtube;PZbG9i1oGPA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZbG9i1oGPA[/video]