Again....But it's never the guns!

[TaraJo]

It doesn't matter. You said it was a stupid law to write and that civilians never should have had guns. If the government has guns, so should we. A people should always be able to protect itself from tyranny. The framers of the Constitution new that better than anyone.

The government also has tanks and nuclear weapons. Should we have those, too?

Also, worth considering, the second amendment was written a long time ago. The guns they had then were primitave muskets, not semi-automatic assault rifles. It's worth considering what the framers would have said if such destructive weapons existed then.

But if we're looking at the constitution, let's take a better look at the second amendment, shall we?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I'm not ignoring he part that says the people can keep and bear arms, but I'm wondering why people reject the first part of the amendment which specfically references a well regulated militia. Every time someone tries to regulate guns, the NRA starts screaming "slippery slope!" and talking about how the government is gonna take away all our guns.