[strideashort]

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.

It’s about the right.

The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed, _because_ a well regulated Militia, is necessary to the security of a free State.

The point is to prevent the state from monopolizing violence, simple as.

[stymaar]

> The point is to prevent the state from monopolizing violence, simple as.

Absolutely not. The state and the federal government definitely keep the monopoly of violence: you can't kill someone you believe raped your wife, the government can (under due process but still).

Refusing the government to have the monopoly of violence would mean that other groups independent from the state can exert violence on their fellow American citizens. That's was obviously not the intent here…

[strideashort]

A single man is no threat to the state, so your example is wrong.

A militia could be.

To be able to form militia to resist the government, individuals have absolute right to be armed.

The mechanics is really pretty simple.

And yes, I believe that extends to all arms, as is written, otherwise the intent - to be able to form militia which can overpower the government - can not be fulfilled.

That is the constitution.

I am not saying I agree with it, but at the same time, without absolute right to bear arms, the government _will_ demilitarize the people.

[sophacles]

A well regulated militia would determine what types of guns, what ammo, what uniforms, what qualifies a member, etc.

Besides the freedom of the State means that its not subordinate to another State. Not that random people get to shoot at the duly elected State government.

[rolph]

regulation, as a constraint vs extremes of behaviour, keeping something within acceptable boundries.

duly elected or not, a government that persues an undue course of action is in need of regulation. the proximal context, a militia occupying cities to enforce the taking of taxes, liberties, and autonomy is a militia requiring regulation.

that regulation manifests as a resistance to application of force that is bane rather than boon to the social order.

that requires the bearing of arms that place the regulating faction [plebe] on equal terms with the offending militia.

[strideashort]

You are simply reading the sentence wrong. Well regulated militia is not condition.

[stymaar]

Right, it was juste written down there to decorate the paper of the constitution.