Slow day at work so dug this up...
Article XVII. The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority, and be governed by it.
Now... I know that every gun grabbers argument about the US constitution is that it is for the militia, because of that pesky comma.
Funny part is... I see no comma here. I see a very direct sentence. "The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence."
So are they basically making laws that violate the state constitution or is it just me?
Article XVII. The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority, and be governed by it.
Now... I know that every gun grabbers argument about the US constitution is that it is for the militia, because of that pesky comma.
Funny part is... I see no comma here. I see a very direct sentence. "The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence."
So are they basically making laws that violate the state constitution or is it just me?