Originally Posted by issodhos
What I "posit", NW ponderer, is, I think, more straight forward. In adding the restriction of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution, the states were making it clear that the federal government they were creating would have neither the power nor the authority to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
With that clarification, I completely disagree, and neither logic nor history supports that construction, in my view.


A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich