Mob Rule Denied: Kyle Rittenhouse Acquitted! ⋆ 🔔 The Liberty Daily

submitted by cottoneyejoe from thelibertydaily.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Read the 2nd Amendment, Jet. Here:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

James Madison wrote this especially to protect the People from the State and from EACH OTHER. It is explicitly against vigilantism, favoring instead a "well REGULATED militia," particularly when this is necessary to the secutiry of a free State. (Rittenhouse did not remain with a regulated militia, nor did he know how to behave like he was in one.)

Edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGB7yTZEZE4

[–]jet199 8 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

Doesn't matter, Rittenhouse's actions are covered fine by the "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" part.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The entire sentence is the amendment, not little phrases of the sentence. The context of the phrase you mention is the law, not the phrase itself. This is a very old argument with NRA activists. For James Madison and others, the context of the law - the full sentence - is the REASON for that law. If one could take phrases of laws out of their legal contexts on a regular basis, there would be very few effective laws. Moreover, it the amendment ware merely - "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" - then that's exactly what the amendment would state. The rest of the sentence would not be required. Absolutely no one wants vigilante justice, unless they're unaware of how that could backfire and get themselves killed.

[–]StillLessons 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The entire sentence is the amendment, not little phrases of the sentence.

You make a very interesting point. I've never heard it put this way before, and it does matter. The debate about guns in the hands of citizens is as old as the country itself; the founding fathers disagreed on this as we do. Thus probably the entire sentence represents a way to keep the debate alive. The founders recognized the debate is a valuable one, and came up with a phrasing that gives each side enough to be able to keep them coming to the table. I've never thought of what you say here before. Thanks.