|
|
|
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 America’s Second Amendment really say?
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A linguist at San Diego State University, Jeffrey Kaplan, argues that the prefatory clause is false. America, despite having no more militias, remains “a free state”, as do many other countries. He says that in parallel constructions like “Today being St Patrick’s Day, I will buy drinks for everyone in the bar,” if it turns out today is not in fact St Patrick’s Day, the promise in the main clause needs “repair”: a chance to cancel the offer or negotiate something else with the patrons. He put the St Patrick’s Day problem to 50 experimental subjects—80% said that if the presupposition was false, the offer was no longer operative. |
| Comment by:
dasing
(11/18/2017)
|
| The militia is still the whole of the people...just because the FED has removing our rights for the last century the people, who are still American, will rise to the call of liberty!!! |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
