Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Place An Ad | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Second Amendment written long ago

March 31, 2013

DEAR EDITOR: ‘‘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 infringe....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(316)

liemonger

Apr-14-13 7:38 PM

See how dense she is?

Can't handle reality.

Probably because she doesn't live in it.

More government, taking more freedoms.

Doesn't matter to the dumbs though.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-14-13 7:37 PM

"" prefatory clause (“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State”) declared the amendment’s only purpose or merely announced a purpose to introduce the operative clause (“the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”)."

"Nowhere else in the Constitution does a “right” attributed to “the people” refer to anything other than an individual right. What is more, in all six other provisions of the Constitution that mention “the people,” the term unambiguously refers to all members of the political community, not an unspecified subset."

Deal with it, LITTLE LADY.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DefeatSBB5

Apr-14-13 3:51 PM

See what I mean?

Liemonger's sole response is to doggedly repeat the same old same old litany of the stoooooopids.

And to call me a lady, which the protection of anonymity frees him/her/it to do. Would never do it to my face.

Your homophobic, misogynistic locker-room taunts and mindless, puerile repetitions can't erase the words.

"well-regulated"

Scalia coined the term "prefatory" to justify ignoring those words; there is no such syntactical element in the history of English grammar.

But he had to have some excuse for ignoring the phrase.

"Well-regulated" -- seems pretty clear.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-13-13 10:27 PM

Boo hoo nanna nuuunooo.

Won't change reality.

No matter how much you cry.

It won't change.

Booo hooooo.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-13-13 10:26 PM

The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-13-13 10:26 PM

Deal with it, LITTLE LADY.

Deal with it, LITTLE LADY.

Deal with it, LITTLE LADY.

Deal with it, LITTLE LADY.

Deal with it, LITTLE LADY.

Deal with it, LITTLE LADY.

Deal with it, LITTLE LADY.

Deal with it, LITTLE LADY.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-13-13 10:26 PM

" prefatory clause (“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State”) declared the amendment’s only purpose or merely announced a purpose to introduce the operative clause (“the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”)."

"Nowhere else in the Constitution does a “right” attributed to “the people” refer to anything other than an individual right. What is more, in all six other provisions of the Constitution that mention “the people,” the term unambiguously refers to all members of the political community, not an unspecified subset."

Deal with it, LITTLE LADY.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-13-13 10:26 PM

"The 2nd Amendment was written before our country had an organized military."

Doesn't matter.

The 2nd Amendment is about self defense.

Go learn something.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DefeatSBB5

Apr-13-13 2:01 PM

. . . so they simply disqualified the words they didn't like.

I have posted the following question MANY times for all you gun fetishists to answer, but, so far, nobody has the brains, background, literacy, or skill to answer it, so here it is again: Please post one (1) other example from history (or another historical or, even, contemporary document) or literature -- in other words, an example NOT made up for the occasion -- or a so-called "prefatory clause" that functions as merely an introduction, and bears no causal, logical connection to the rest of the sentence.

Any of you pro-gun literary types out there care to tackle that one?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DefeatSBB5

Apr-13-13 2:00 PM

"The court declared that 'a prefatory clause does not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause' and, therefore, only the second clause has any 'operative,' or substantive, meaning.

Consequently, the people have the right to own guns independent of service in a militia. The conservative majority reached that interpretation by ignoring a governing grammatical construction, which existed when the Second Amendment was written and exists to this day. As a result of employing a grammatical construction unfamiliar to the experts, i.e., grammarians and linguists, the majority effectively erased 13 words from the Constitution, i.e., 'A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state …'

So Scalia and the conservative majority invented a brand new grammatical element to pseudo-grammatically 13 words in the 2nd Amendment -- they couldn't make it fit with their agenda (a ruling that there is an INDIVIDUAL right to keep and bear arms) . . .

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-13-13 11:00 AM

Prefatory.

Got it, little lady.

PREFATORY.

MOVE.

YOU'RE NOT NEEDED. Prefatory. Got it, little lady. PREFATORY. Prefatory.

MOVE.

YOU'RE NOT NEEDED.

YOU'RE NOT NEEDED.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-13-13 10:59 AM

.The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms."

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-13-13 10:59 AM

prefatory clause (“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State”) declared the amendment’s only purpose or merely announced a purpose to introduce the operative clause (“the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”)."

"Nowhere else in the Constitution does a “right” attributed to “the people” refer to anything other than an individual right. What is more, in all six other provisions of the Constitution that mention “the people,” the term unambiguously refers to all members of the political community, not an unspecified subset."

Deal with it, LITTLE LADY.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DefeatSBB5

Apr-11-13 5:33 PM

By the way: Here's the best answer on how to curb the traffic in assault weapons and other military-style arms in the hands of civilians -- repeal the 2nd Amendment.

Simple as that.

Repeal the stoooopid law. It has no place in a free society anyhow.

Get rid of the damnn thing.

And fire all these amateur Constitution geeeks who can't even read, or choose to ignore parts of the Constitution they don't like.

Just because they don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't say it.

"Well-regulated"

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-08-13 4:55 PM

"(reportedly"

About as accurate as anything she'll ever post.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DefeatSBB5

Apr-08-13 8:27 AM

In a related note, the homeowner's association in the complex where Travon Martin was gunned down agreed to an out-of-court settlement with the family, to the tune (reportedly)of $1,000,000.

The suit against Zimmermann himself is pending; he awaits trial on a charge of 2nd degree murder.

No word yet on the suit reportedly filed against the manufacturer of Zimmermann's gun.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-07-13 8:29 AM

Back.

Back to her mouth.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-06-13 7:26 PM

"I'm beginning to think.."

No, you're never gonna do that.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-06-13 7:26 PM

"In Connecticut, at least there's a start: "

THEN LEAVE.

Move there.

No one here is dumb enough to stop you.

GO.

Leech off of them.

Make this place better, moonbat.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-06-13 7:23 PM

"welcome back BALLS... "

They're all in your mouth, little lady.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DefeatSBB5

Apr-05-13 10:46 PM

In Connecticut, at least there's a start:

"The bill requires background checks for nearly all private gun sales, and bans the sale of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.

It also expands the state's assault weapons ban to include scores of new gun models.

These provisions will go into effect immediately, Malloy said, while others will be phased in.

The bill also includes new registration requirements for those who already own high-capacity magazines, and creates the nation's first dangerous weapon offender registry.

In a move that many legislators applauded Wednesday night, the bill allocates at least $15 million more for school safety and mental health monitoring programs."

Maybe this is a model for a Fed. law!

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-05-13 9:55 PM

"LIEMONGREL ever find your BALLS????? "

Yep.

About half way down your throat.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

liemonger

Apr-05-13 9:55 PM

"Sorry marmel but you didn't answer the questions."

Ya mean as you've CONTINUALLY failed to do, failure.

Anytime you're ready with you 87 cal and 40mm Glock.

LOL.

She'll never get it... yeah... she gets "it."

But, ... never mind.

Your.

LOL.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Marmel

Apr-05-13 4:16 PM

Sorry marmel but you didn't answer the questions. That's ok because in retrospect I realize that you don't have the intellect to answer questions.

LOL! Has nothing to do with intellect loser boy! It has everything to do with your honesty and character.

Come on you know that!

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

reallytiredofit

Apr-05-13 4:13 PM

When you get to the stage where someone is incapable of thought on a subject it is better to just smile and walk away. ;) bye now.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 316 comments Show More Comments
 
 

 

I am looking for: