Is the 2nd Voided?

[RC20]

As we do not have well regulated Militias, then the second clause would seem to be voided, and gun ownership has no more an Inalienable right than car ownership.

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.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

http://guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html

Also, thank you for finally expressing an idea with sufficient clarity that I understood your point.

 

[zukiphile]

As we do not have well regulated Militias, then the second clause would seem to be voided, and gun ownership has no more an Inalienable right than car ownership.

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.

Note the difference in your bolded term and the term in the COTUS.

 

[5whiskey]

As we do not have well regulated Militias

Since when

United States Code says otherwise, and note that it covers more than just the national guard

http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title10/subtitleA/part1/chapter12&edition=prelim

then the second clause would seem to be voided

Even if someone declared the militia null and void, SCOTUS has now declared the 2nd a distinct individual right which does not rely on the prepatory clause of "militia."

I fail to see your motivation or point? Are you now in favor of any gun regulation that could be dreamed of because of this incident? I understand outrage, and sadness, and remorse, and a number of other feelings because of this carnage. This is a sad and tragic time for America. BUT... "Assault Weapons" have been banned in France for decades and 130 citizens were killed in the Paris attacks in 2015. More than double than this massacre. Their laws didn't prevent that, and we should bear that in mind when we think about gun control here.

 

[Danoobie]

There is no such thing as gun control. It's been proven time and again,
law after law, in state after state. Gun control laws never stop criminals
from being criminals.

 

[44 AMP]

As we do not have well regulated Militias, then the second clause would seem to be voided, and gun ownership has no more an Inalienable right than car ownership.

The Supreme Court disagrees with you.

In the Heller vs DC decision, the court held that we have a right to keep and bear arms, independent of the militia.

The first clause of the 2nd amendment simply explains why the right of the people to keep & bear arms shall not be infringed.

Remember that the 2nd Amendment, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights, does NOT GRANT ANY RIGHTS. It is a listing of things the government shall not do, concerning our rights, rights which exist independent of any clause or article of any document.

NATURAL RIGHTS, God given rights, Inalienable rights, not things granted by a government, but rights we have, simply because we exist.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Since 44 AMP answered the question, there is no need for another repetition of the militia debate.

Thus, I'm calling it.