It might be a bit confusing to understand the amendment due to the wording. It says that because a properly functioning militia is necessary for the security of the free state, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. It does not say that you must be part of a militia in order to bear arms. You may want to learn to comprehend what you read before asking others to learn to read.
Edit:
The section about the militia is extremely important, because it explicitly states the reason for the right to bear arms has nothing to do with hunting. Its purpose is to maintain a free society. Most people in this thread understand that, despite your opinion that they don't.
That helps to illustrate the problem. Most people in this thread apparently believe militia has nothing to do with the Second Amendment.
They don't want to acknowledge the militia clause, they don't want to talk about it, and they want to cuss at you and insult you if you don't agree that only four words of that Amendment are important.
Define "reasonable restrictions."
Now define, "Shall not be infringed."
Get it?
Define "militia."
Define "being." (It's in there, and it's important.)
Seriously? Learn some history.
Learn to read the amendment. The whole thing.
It might be a bit confusing to understand the amendment due to the wording. It says that because a properly functioning militia is necessary for the security of the free state, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. It does not say that you must be part of a militia in order to bear arms. You may want to learn to comprehend what you read before asking others to learn to read.
Edit: The section about the militia is extremely important, because it explicitly states the reason for the right to bear arms has nothing to do with hunting. Its purpose is to maintain a free society. Most people in this thread understand that, despite your opinion that they don't.
Well regulated doesn't mean what you think it means. And you probably fail to understand that little comma is separating two distinct ideas.
Maybe you should read some James Madison.
Yep, and here's the legal definition:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/246
That helps to illustrate the problem. Most people in this thread apparently believe militia has nothing to do with the Second Amendment.
They don't want to acknowledge the militia clause, they don't want to talk about it, and they want to cuss at you and insult you if you don't agree that only four words of that Amendment are important.
You are missing the point again and again. The GOVT has no part in the militia; the CITIZENS are the militia.