Keep and Bear Arms - Gun Owners Home Page

NOTE! This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or any other living person besides the one who posted them. Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion Policy, but there's a bad apple in every bunch, and we have no control over bigots and other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com

The Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:

What Does the Second Amendment Mean? Submitted by: Mark A. Taff Website: http://www.marktaff.com	There are 3 comments on this story Post Comments \| Read Comments
It's one of the most controversial passages of the Constitution. Allegedly, it's also one of the most obscure and unintelligible sections. The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads, "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."

Comment by: laker1 (4/9/2016)

1. Keep-That means I own it and you can't have it.
2. Bare-means I have it right here on me and its loaded.
3.Militia-all able bodied 18 and over.

Thus its a civil, natural, and constitutional right.

Comment by: jac (4/10/2016)

Study some history and read the federalist papers. There is no ambiguity or unintelligibility in the meaning and intent of the second amendment.

Some people want to subvert the meaning of the second amendment to fit their self conceived agenda.

Just like the revisionists are teaching that the Japanese were already defeated and there was no reason to drop the atomic bombs. Study the history of 1945 and one will find that the Japanese were preparing to inflict heavy casualties on the US armed forces in the event an invasion was necessary.

Comment by: stevelync (4/10/2016)

Why would the framers enumerate rights to individuals in all the 10 amendments of the BOR and yet some how exclude 2A as an individual right?

The debates during the constitutional convention were all about individual rights. Anything involving authorized govt action was referred to as 'powers".