• Alph4d0g@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    The 2nd Amendment is a single sentence and the first four words, “a well regulated militia”, are the subject. This is grammar. Unless you think the authors were bad at grammar, there’s not much to misinterpret.

    • Narauko@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Yeah, but you have to take the whole sentence to actually identify the grammar, not just the first 4 words. Beyond what has already been said about well regulated meaning ‘in good functional order’, that is a explanatory preposition to why the rights of the people to keep and bear arms is important. The Federalist papers back this up well enough as well.

      If I said “Because being hungry sucks, access to the fridge shall not be restricted”, this does not imply that one must be hungry to have access to the fridge. Maybe it would be better if it were so people couldn’t over eat or eat out of boredom, but you would need to change that sentence to make it mean you had to be hungry to access the fridge.

      There is also the fact that under federal law, everyone not serving in the standing military or the national guard (the organized militia) is legally classified as the unorganized militia, but I don’t think that even matters to the reading of the amendment.