NO, as you and he both say, that is what you have interpolated the 2nd to mean. At no point at any location in the constitution or the associated documents does it say that like about "all enemies, foreign or domestic". Going solely on the documents in question it refers to people being familer with military grade weapons in order for citizen to transition to a milita with minimal training.
If you want to assume that YOU personaly know what was in the mind of the constitutional congress when they wrote it... good for you. If you know that much about what they where thinking, why didnt they actauly write what you are claiming they ment?
Who gives a crap what the Constitution says? Are you going to base your logic on what a bunch of guys 200+ years ago put down on paper?
WHO CREATED GOVERNMENTS? God?? No??
Ok - then MEN created governments ( I believe this was elaborated up in the Declaration of Indepence) - therefore ALL governments are sown with the seeds of their own destruction and the people who have to live under them.
Why don't you explain to me why an organization - given powers by "laws" that are elaborated and put into place by MEN (or women) - who are no different from you and I - should hold the exclusive power of life and death over some other people. Those other people being Jewish , or black, or Christian, or Muslim - or gun owners, or liberals - or whatever.
It all boils down to this: I (and every other person on the planet) - has the inate right of self defense. That means I have the right to beat the crap out of (or shoot) - some guy who breaks into my house and is trying to steal my stuff or rape my wife, and it also extends to me and my neighbors being assaulted by a "government" thrown together by a bunch of people the next town over - who suddenly decide to group together and come steal all of our stuff - and rape our wives.
Call it whatever you want - a group of guys - a militia, a gang - whatever - it doesn't freaking matter. If I don't have a right to defend myself - then it only follows that I don't have a right to join a group and cooperate to defend ourselves. Furthermore - if I don't have a right to defend myself - WHY WOULD ANY GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION THAT I JOIN - magically and suddenly bestow the right of self defense on me?
Quite frankly I think a lot of people who try going back to the 2nd amendment as a defense of self defense, militias - and gun ownership - make some pretty freaking retarded arguments. If the 2nd amendment didn't exist these people would be left mentally defenseless and unable to explain why gun ownership is a "right" - the same as eating.
Owning a gun is like owning a fork to eat with. When man moved beyond eating everything with his hands or using a stick - a fork became an essential tool - if somebody said " you don't have a right to use that fork" - you would kick them in the teeth and tell them to STFU for being a retard. Well the same train of logic applies to gun ownership - as soon as man gave up using sticks and stones to bash each other's brains in - the new tools (guns) - are just as much of "right" for you to own - as picking up a rock or a stick would have been 1000 years ago.
You don't need the effing 2nd amendment to figure this out. If you can't figure this out - then quite frankly you need to go back to the life and logic 101 course and get your head on straight.
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
