Quote of the day—PersonOnDuty

When democrats read the 2nd Amendment, the words “hunting” and “musket” magically appear, and “the people” gets replaced with “the militia”…

PersonOnDuty
October 21, 2016
Comment to Giffords pushes for gun control in northern Va., DC
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

4 thoughts on “Quote of the day—PersonOnDuty

  1. Actually, they replace “the people” by “the National Guard” since they don’t understand “militia”.

  2. Also, magically, things like homosexual marriage, abortion, illegal immigration, drug legalization, socialized medicine and other things become part of the Constitution.

    It’s almost like they are making it up as they go along and they cannot read plain text designed so that simple citizens could understand it.

    • Lawyers (such as judges) are NOT in the business of dealing with plain text. Their whole purpose in life and the essence of their training is to twist words into other meanings. Any time the Constitution is the subject of some court decision, you can see this very plainly.

      Just consider, for example, the concepts of “compelling government interest” or “strict scrutiny”. See if you can figure out what these mean, and if so, whether there is any conceivable way for an honest person to connect these concepts with the text of the Constitution.

  3. “Militia” in the first subordinate clause refers to the armed citizenry and is synonymous with “the People”in the main clause which is always the main idea of a sentence. Otherwise, the sentence is contradictory to the basic rules of English grammar. The main clause of the sentence DECLARES the right of the people to keep and bear arms. It is absurd to assert that the subordinate opening clause would RESTRICT a right to a government militia. The Government has NO rights, only delegated powers from the
    People who have inalienable rights.

    “I ask sir, who is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials.” –George Mason

Comments are closed.