Never thought much about a comma
Advertise with us Click for Rates
Results 1 to 8 of 8
Like Tree4Likes
  • 1 Post By underdog
  • 1 Post By Mad Scientist
  • 1 Post By Popeye
  • 1 Post By Northtidesix

Thread: Never thought much about a comma

  1. #1
    Senior Member NGF Addict!
    Join Date
    Sep 2012

    Default Never thought much about a comma

    I was watching:
    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] turn to 10:50
    And reading:
    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
    The Second Amendment consists of just one sentence:
    “A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state,
    the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
    Today, scholars debate its bizarre comma placement, trying to make sense of the various clauses,

    I did not do well in english class so i asked the web.
    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
    The first example makes sense to me in this context.
    Use a comma to separate the elements in a series, "He hit the ball, dropped the bat, and ran to first base."

    Some arguments:
    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
    Commas don't much enter into it. Eighteenth-century writers like to insert a comma between subject and verb, though we don't follow such a convention any longer. The comma in the Second Amendment merely sets off the absolute.
    We still have absolute phrases in English, and we typically set them off with commas, viz., The point having been made repeatedly, further discussion would seem idle.

    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
    Regarding commas found in the eight different versions of the Second Amendment returned as ratified from various state legislatures, there was at least one of each with zero, one, two, and three commas. [OSA pp.720, 726, 728, 730, 732] The original sources of the Second Amendment's clauses, the leading Mason Triad clauses in the original state declarations of rights, came in two versions - 'well regulated militia as natural defense' and 'right of the people to bear arms for defense'. [FVRBA pp.65, 72] This simple historical fact makes it evident that the Second Amendment has a fundamentally two clause structure. The fact that the Second Amendment was based upon these two different descriptions of a defensively effective armed civil population made the two clause structure obvious to the Founders no matter how many commas (or caps) a copyist might have added or deleted within its language.

    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
    The meaning of the Second Amendment remained uncontroversial until 1960, when a law review article using sources like American Rifleman asserted an additional, individual, right to bear arms for the purposes of self-defense (Hays 1960). Since that time, a growing bloc of constitutional scholars and historians has asserted that only the individual rights interpretation of the right to bear arms is correct, even calling this new reading the “standard model,” as if the original, collective rights interpretation hadn’t prevailed for more than a century (Bogus 2000b). And the majority of Americans now believe that the Second Amendment guarantees their right to tote a gun. …

    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]&
    at the center of the controversy: the comma. That’s right, the “small crooked point,” as Richard Mulcaster described this punctuation upstart in 1582. The official version of the Second Amendment has three of the little blighters:
    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.

    We know progressives and lawyers enjoy torturing language.
    It seems clear to me?
    Use a comma to separate the elements in a series.
    “A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state,
    (That is the necessary evil part)

    the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
    (“The Ultimate Authority… Resides in the People Alone” part)
    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

    Bonus read:
    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

    What are your thoughts about this?
    Northtidesix likes this.

  2. #2
    Senior Member NGF Addict! wittmeba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    New Castle, Va


    I think there is too much grammar in that simple piece of history but I'm not one to correct it :)

    I have a copy of an explanation of how to carry a gun in a vehicle (to another forum and member) from our Attorney General, Mark Cuccinelli, and his opening words are "It is my opinion...". This doesn't say much for the clarity of law that the average citizen has to live by.
    It is still a scary thought as to how close we came to having Hillary Clinton as president of the USA.

    I don't think children should be separated from their parents when migrating to the USA. They may stay together in Mexico.

  3. #3
    Grand Imperial Poobah NGF Addict! Mad Scientist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    North Carolina


    If you went solely by the wording and punctuation of the Constitution of the United States, both sides could make a case, regarding the right to bear arms. The gun ownership side would have the stronger of the two arguments.

    However when you include other writings of the times, the point of the Second Amendment becomes abundantly clear, the individual God given right of U.S. citizens to own and carry firearms can never be infringed or taken away by the government.

    The Federalist Papers is a very good starting point, if you want to read about what our founding fathers intended, when they drafted the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
    Ziggidy likes this.
    Hidden Content

    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington, the first President of the United States (1789-1797)

  4. Remove Advertisements

  5. #4
    Ancient Gaseous Emanation Popeye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Sacramento area, CA


    All of the obfuscation and dissimulation spewed by our enemies cannot change the clear meaning of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.
    Ziggidy likes this.
    The difference between a Socialist and a Communist is that the Socialist doesn't have all the guns yet.

  6. #5
    9mm is offline
    Senior Member 9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013


    I think the comma is just for emphasis. A rhetorical pause.

    Statistics near the beginning of the video :

    A new gun rolls off an American assembly line every 10 seconds.

    Meanwhile 3 people an hour are killed by guns.

    Soooo, 1 in 120 NEW American made guns eventually kills someone (assuming it was a different gun for each killing, and the gun is then withdrawn from use and destroyed).

    But wait, what about all the guns already in existence? And what about all the people lawfully killed by police officers and other government agents, they factor into those three deaths an hour, right?

    Also, many of those deaths are criminal shooting criminal, gang violence.

    And what about all the foreign made guns that are imported? I'm trying to find some data, but I suspect that the USA is a net importer.

    So a great deal fewer that 1% of guns in the US ever actually kills someone on US soil, legally owned or otherwise. Seem to me there are bigger issues to worry about than trying to stop those deaths by somehow making the other 99%+ of guns "safer" than the people who own then already do, if they are responsible gun owners. "Safer" meaning smaller capacity etc.

    In other words, gun control is bullshit.

  7. #6
    Senior Member Fixit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012


    9MM Quote " In other words, gun control is bullshit. "

    Its right there in the open..... gun CONTROL...... Anyone who doesn't think it is about "controlling" you has their head stuffed up where the sun don't shine. The liberals won't be happy till they know where every gun is in America. Then they will make it impossible to buy new ones, and illegal to sell old ones or pass along to your next of kin.

    Then they will be happy because if that happens we will have lost all "control".

  8. #7
    Senior Member NGF Addict! olhippy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Working in southern In. now but actually live in coastal Tx..


    Then you get the butt wipes who take rifles to restaurants------- and get guns banned. Attention getting whores are all they are.
    " to educate a mans mind and not educate his morals, you have an educated menance to society" Teddy Roosevelt " A government big enough to give you everything you need, is strong enough to take everything you have" Thomas Jefferson -1778

  9. #8
    Senior Member NGF Addict! Northtidesix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    South Texas farm.


    The second amendment is the anchor that secures the other nine. We lose that and we are SCREWED.
    Ziggidy likes this.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

    Search tags for this page

    quotes of george washington about a well regulated militia being necessary

    Click on a term to search for related topics.