On 4/2/2012 2:39 PM, BAR wrote:
In , lid says...
I didn't question that. Your original statement questioned why there
would be a 2nd amendment at all if not for *self* defense. Explicit in
the amendment itself is the answer... "a well regulated militia being
necessary to the security of a free state".
It is there to ensure that the states can defend themselves and
individuals can defend themselves.
"*a* free state", clearly meaning the nation, and nothing whatsoever
about self defense... I think we've exhausted the discussion. If you
don't want to admit the obvious that's cool.
By the way, I respect you for your stated opinion on Zimmerman's
responsibilities.