The original meaning is to create rules. Well functioning devices wasn't associated with it until 1660. Nobody is saying that's not one of the meanings. But it's meant to create rules since the literal Roman empire, and as I've demonstrated was used that way legally by our founding fathers.
The founding fathers were famously divided on federal power. The 2nd amendment is their compromise. Meant to be read in plain English. It doesn't need partisan spin. If I cared though I could go find the other side to it but I don't need to. They made sure of that by putting it in writing and cherry picking stuff isn't going to change that.
The founding fathers were famously divided on federal power. The 2nd amendment is their compromise.
Factually wrong. See Federalist and Antifederalist Papers.
I have.
Evidently not.
THE power of regulating the militia and of commanding its services in times of insurrection and invasion are natural incidents to the duties of superintending the common defence, and of watching over the internal peace of the confederacy.
It requires no skill in the science of war to discern that uniformity in the organization and discipline of the militia would be attended with the most beneficial effects, whenever they were called into service for the public defence. - Federalist 29
Oh no, we've been down this road before and your cherry picked quotes never mean what you want them to mean. I'm not wasting my time dredging up the papers again.
The original meaning is to create rules. Well functioning devices wasn't associated with it until 1660. Nobody is saying that's not one of the meanings. But it's meant to create rules since the literal Roman empire, and as I've demonstrated was used that way legally by our founding fathers.
The founding fathers were famously divided on federal power. The 2nd amendment is their compromise. Meant to be read in plain English. It doesn't need partisan spin. If I cared though I could go find the other side to it but I don't need to. They made sure of that by putting it in writing and cherry picking stuff isn't going to change that.
Factually wrong. See Federalist and Antifederalist Papers.
I have.
Evidently not.
Oh no, we've been down this road before and your cherry picked quotes never mean what you want them to mean. I'm not wasting my time dredging up the papers again.