Hi! Tony,

On 16 Oct 17 15:42, TIM RICHARDSON wrote to you:

 TL>> And that is the situation the Second Amendment is there for, but
 TL>> isn't it supposed to be in the context of an organised militia of
 TL>> the people?

 TR> No. `A Millitia' in that amendment is quite apart from `The Right Of
 TR> The People!

To my way of thinking there is a very important word missing in that amendment.
 A single word: notwithstanding.  That is to say the writers intended to say,
and I have to paraphrase here as I don't have the actual wording, that they
wanted to provide for a time when there may have to be a second revolution,
and, I think they intended: '(notwithstanding) the requirement for an armed
militia, the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed'.

The distinction is best contained in a couple of EwwToob (YT) videos I've
donwloaded.  I have them as:

* Penn & Teller on Gun Control [Published on Feb 11, 2013]
* Is Gun Ownership a Right in the USofA [PragerU on Feb 27, 2017]

That's the filenames they have on their respective MP4s here.  Seek them out. 
After viewing them, would you say that I'm mistaken about the amendment?

Cheers,
Paul.

... Lymph (v.), to walk with a lisp.
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20110213