Would you support repeal of the Second Amendment?

[Motown_Johnny]

156. Yes, and IMO it existed because the slave states wanted to keep armies

in order to protect their property/slaves. Read it again. Notice that it is all one sentence and therefore has one subject.








They needed militias/armies to secure their freedom to keep slaves so the right to keep and bear arms was necessary in order to keep those armies to protect that state's "freedom".

Now that the states no longer need militias to secure their freedom the arms that were necessary then are not necessary now and no longer should fall under the protection of this amendment. To me the first half reads as a qualifier. If we no longer meet that qualification then the second half is no longer relevant.

I would argue that an established law protection exists but not a constitutional one.



I know nobody agrees with me, I don't care. I have read it a thousand times or more and it always reads the same way. No other interpretation makes any sense to me at all.