So, Mad...

[Mad]

Those so called sources have the most subjective reasons. Therefore, they're not historically accurate in their opinions.


The Embarrassing Second Amendment

If you read through the whole thing there are footnotes which back up the legal reasoning. As well as support the true intent of the founding of this country.

any research that supports one side or another is going to be subjective, moron. just as the sites you mention are subjective. your sites arguments are using logic that are no longer meaningful as the government and populace that existed when the amendment was written no longer are the same creature and therefore the argument is irrelevant.

I'm sorry, I must have missed when you received your Phd in History.

The last link I posted is filled with all sorts of historically accurate information, see the footnotes for case history. Regardless of how you'd like to spin it, your beliefs have no basis in reality or history.

Last time I checked we are still living in a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy like you think.

I win.



Edited By Mad on 1094936867