Quote:
Originally posted by A. Snodgrass
There is supposed to be no comma after Arms as well as none after militia. While this might seem to be a small point, it also changes the definition of the whole amendment in question. Also please note that the right to bear arms is also contingent with the fact that it has to be justifiable as for use in a militia.
|
This is an interesting point. In the past few minutes, I've looked at more than five different transcriptions of the Second Amendment, and only one of them had the wording (placement of the commas) the way you describe.
This is the version I find most convincing, considering it's hosted by the U.S. National Archives & Records Administration. The wording you describe, Ashlee, does not make sense in proper English.
However, none of this changes the fact that the amendment in question implies the existence of a "well regulated Militia [sic]". I, for one, don't believe that there many "well regulated" militias, except for, perhaps, the National Guard.
I believe this amendment should be clarified and restated because of the fact that the time in which the concept of needing a "well regulated" militia for the protection of our homeland has passed.