+137: THE WORLD AS A JURY

I once saw two judges from the final court seem to take different sides on the issue of taking or learning things from some places elsewhere in the world. I think we need here to distinguish between two things: Taking things at the sophisticated level of thinking and taking things at the level of basic recognition and comprehension. My concern here is the latter. Contrary to how my position regarding the Second Amendment here hardly seems substantially shared, I still wish to go in a worldwide expedition testing how people naturally understand the Amendment and if that would fit my position or that of the others here. How much of the world speak English either as first or second language? And it is not like we are reading Shakespearean text here. I would not speak about who had taken what position here. I would just put the audience at that environment and time and see how the Amendment would be taken. I think that this issue here would not only be decided to my side but that the majority would be overwhelming enough to point out the distinction between normal and abnormal comprehension here.