[MRM]

The reason the body of law surounding the second amendment is a mess is because even the founding fathers weren't sure what it meant. They wrote it, and a fair amount of the rest of the bill of rights, to be deliberately ambiguous. Partly to get it passed, partly so that later generations could decide what it meant.

The second amendement is unique to the bill of rights. Diagram the sentence. Tell me what the subject, etc., are suposed to be. See what I mean? The rest of the bill of rights is gramatically correct and pretty easy to follow.

"A well regulated militia . . ." What do they mean? Are they requiring a well regulated militia or are they just refering to one? Or do they mean that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be restricted if the restriction gets in the way of having a well regulated militia? If so, are other restrictions ok as long as the militia continues unabated?

I grew up around guns. It is fair to say that I love guns. Mmmmm ...... guns. Long guns, short guns, automatics, revolvers, bolt action, lever action, pump, it's all good. But I also recall that something called Shay's Rebellion was put down with great force by the very people who wrote the second amendment within a very few short years of the Revolutionary War.

This suggests to me that the founding fathers did contemplate some reasonable restrictions on firearms. I think they intended to create a tension between the gun toting, freedom loving masses who will keep the country free and the elites who want a well behaved country and keep the country well organized. We need both kinds to keep the country great.

The tension between the two sides of the debate and the ongoing debate itself is what makes this country so great. If one side grows too powerful and overwhelms the other, we lose the debate and our country will go out of ballance and lose much of its strength.