Steve of CA wrote: Personally I do not own a gun and would not feel safer if I had one, but I do not have a problem with law abiding people buying guns. That being the case, I have to ask of Mr. Ransom and others here, what controls, if any, do you favor over the purchase and use of weapons, including semi-automatic weapons such as the one used by the killer in Aurora? Or do you think we have too much gun control with the laws we have now? - The American Solution: Reach for the Guns
Dear Steve,...












To paraphrase: "A militia subject to lots of restrictions, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be restricted." Huh? Sheer gibberish!
To paraphrase correctly: "A well-outfitted, well-practiced militia being necessary to the security of Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be restricted." Now, it makes perfect sense.
The meaning of "regulation" remains, in common British English. Ask an AMERICAN gunsmith to "regulate" your rifle, and he'll look puzzled, and ask, "Whaddya want me to do, Buddy--pass a law against it?"
Ask the same question of the British gunsmith, and he'll answer: "Yes, sir! I'll have it cleaned up and oiled tomorrow morning. By the way, did you want the sights regulated for 100 yards, or some other distance?"
“I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole body of the people except for a few public officials. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
George Mason
“A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves ... and include all men capable of bearing arms ...To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms.”
Senator Richard Henry Lee, 1788, on “militia” in the 2nd Amendment
Space prohibits listing dozens more, but there is absolutely no doubt as to what they meant by militia.