How about this form for the second amendment?
The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed, because a well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State.
Or this?
A well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State and therefor the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
If they intended those right to be always given and the "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" part was intended for merely explaining why those rights should always be given then how on earth could one see those forms were not closer to mind than the way they wrote the amendment? It is hard to imagine that for one person speaking on the spot let alone a group of people preparing what they are saying and for making none other than a constitution.
No comments:
Post a Comment