It Just Seems So Simple

So I’m messing around on this old internet thing and I decide to punch up that most amazing of documents, The Constitution Of The United States Of America. There’s one part in particular that has always bothered me and that would be amendment number two, The Right To Bear Arms.

”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.”

I’ve looked and looked at the above sentence and I just can’t figure out how it has come to mean that you and I, as private citizens, have the right to own a gun unless we are part of a “well regulated militia”. That’s what it says. Since a well regulated militia is necessary for a free state, the right of the people to bear arms for the purpose of said militia shall not be infringed. How else can that be interpreted? The words have not changed since 1791. It does not now nor has it ever said that private citizens have the right to own guns. Sorry, but that’s what’s written. “A well regulated militia”, which for those that don’t know the meaning of militia, means an army composed of ordinary citizens. In the case of the amendment mentioned said militia must be well regulated.

I know I’m repeating a lot of words here but it just seems so simple to me. Since we do allow our private citizens the privilege, and it is a privilege, of owning guns then there simply can be no argument when it comes to regulations governing that ownership. The only right to ownership stated in the Constitution is if you are part of that well regulated militia I’ve spoken so much about. Read the amendment, it just seems so simple…