I guess you failed at understanding the 2nd Amendment. You should probably go back and read the words there. Take out your agenda and for good measure read the Federalist Papers take on it as well.
"Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it."
After all, they were written (by those pesky Founding Fathers everyone loves to hate now!) as a primer for the people to digest what they representatives were voting for in the birth of this Nation. Wouldn't be a bad idea as your post shows you don't have a grasp on the topic at hand.
DrMaddVibe wrote:
