· super noob
Im glad Im not the only one that felt that way. I was no clearer after reading it then before. Which I have to say I felt realy clear about this topic. As Sharon said its as clear as it gets in the 2nd amendment.I just read said paper and I can barely make head nor tail of what Hamilton is writing about. His writing is so filled with ruffles and flourishes that it is most difficult to understand what point he is making. I certainly saw nothing to clarify the placement of the first comma in the Second Amendment since that comma separates it from " being necessary to the security of a free state".
Whatever the punctuation, the Second Amendment states that a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state. This part of the Amendment only confuses things.
It would better have been stated " The rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Regardless of the reason, that is the functional part. As so many of us have said, ' which part of "infringed" don't you understand'?