In article .com,
Bill wrote:
It's clear when you leave off the first part... "a well regulated
militia" doesn't give an individual the right to own a gun unless
they're part of a WELL REGULATED militia.

Where does it say that you have to be part of an active militia? A
militia does not mean military. One definition from wikioedia is:

I never said it did and never said it was. It does need to be WELL
REGULATED, and that doesn't mean some guy who who keeps a handgun
under his pillow. Or, is that what you're claiming?

The entire able-bodied male population of a community, town, or state,
which can be called to arms against an invading enemy, to enforce the
law, or to respond to a disaster.

Well, so, my point exactly.

I don't think that it needs to be limited to men only but a militia
can be called up at any time. The bill of rights don't say that you
have to be part of a militia to own a gun, that is just part of the
justification.

You're off the deep end here... it specifically says a well regulated
militia. So, what's your point?

No actually the lines you were responding to were a quote from a
reporting that was talking about gun control. The words "ban" and
"Ganz" were never present.

You're said repeatedly that all liberals want to ban guns. I'm a
liberal, and I don't want to ban them. Thus, your statement is false.

I have plenty of evidence as well as statements from legal
prfessionals. I also have historical precedence, but none of that
matters. You have your opinions and I can respect that but if you
feel it necessary to ban things to feel safer, then eventually you
will have to ban opinions because they are more dangerous than any
weapon out there.

So far, we haven't seen anything except your claims to have the
facts.




--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com