+154 (second amendment interpretation 112)

I want to replace speaking about the "separating words" I mentioned in the preceding post with saying:

The form mentioned there for the Second Amendment would have, contrary to what we have now, a meaning for putting what they say over (control-wise) existence. That is because the use of "because" there could suggest eliminating the separate existence for the part before the second comma by dissolving it in the mixture with the part after that comma through explaining it as the reason for that part.

Calling the use of a comma in such position for merely separate words is probably better reserved for when the words directly around it could construct a different meaning. Related to this, I wonder if, linguistically, "state" would have been open to connect with "the right" on the other side of that comma as a verb here if it were not capitalized.  

I also want to point out here that putting existence at the root permits us to deal with what was said like anything else we hear with regard to separating witnessing from mental opinions and beliefs. It is through this middle layer then one proceeds to take the part before the second comma as reasoning.