2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: How to shut up a gun nut about his Second Amendment rights. [View all]jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)hack channels alex hamilton: To oblige the great body of the yeomanry and of the other classes of the citizens to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people and a serious public inconvenience and loss.
That rules & regulations were indeed attached to a well reg'd militia is not the point which hamilton was trying to make, so there's little reason for him to have pointed them out.
You realize of course hamilton is contending that citizens cannot be expected to reach the degree of perfection of a well reg'd militia.
Your argument fails, since hamilton is providing simply one aspect of a well regulated militia - he is not going into full detail about what a well regulated militia would be, just that the aspect of training citizens to well regulated perfection is inobtainable by repetitive military exercise.
hack: military exercises and evolutions = well regulated.
certainly one aspect of contributing to a well reg'd militia, but not the entire meaning as it meant then.
hack: So lets agree that there is more than one definition of well regulated.
You sidestep, there are many aspects of well regulated as meant in 2ndA.
You ducked websters 1828 definition of regulate & regulations, and sidestepped away from when you said this: "well regulated" in the context of the 2A has nothing to to do with rules and regulations. That is a modern definition of regulated that did not come in to common usages until the industrial revolution.
Yet it was right there in websters 1828, regulate meant rules & restrictions, well prior to the industrial revolution.