Jump to content

Forum Support & Announcements

Sign in to follow this  

Forum support and announcements from SCOUTER.com

149 topics in this forum

  1. Moderators, please check the Moderator Lounge

    • 0 replies
    • 498 views
  2. When to spin-off.

    • 3 replies
    • 521 views
  3. Not Sure What To Do

    • 20 replies
    • 1310 views
  4. Rules and Moderation

    • 48 replies
    • 1771 views
  5. It was I

    • 0 replies
    • 601 views
    • 16 replies
    • 682 views
    • 11 replies
    • 687 views
    • 9 replies
    • 610 views
    • 2 replies
    • 550 views
    • 29 replies
    • 1239 views
    • 0 replies
    • 506 views
    • 39 replies
    • 1174 views
  6. Hey, Moderator

    • 7 replies
    • 585 views
    • 11 replies
    • 712 views
    • 7 replies
    • 616 views
Sign in to follow this  
  • LATEST POSTS

    • @David CO , @skeptic  hopefully my edit to skeptic's post will suffice.   
    • I cannot find the edit function on the post.  Perhaps one of the mods can delete it?  I overlooked the comma anyway which specifies People as opposed to the militia.  So the people are not regulated in the amendment.  If someone will point me to an edit function, I can take care of it too.  Thanks.
    • Skeptic, please correct your post. You attributed something to me that was posted by someone else. In answer to your question, an explanatory clause is not usually seen as limiting or expanding the functional parts of a rule or law.  The example I was given, when studying school law, involved firecrackers. The rule stated that students may not explode firecrackers at school, as they might frighten the horses and cause them to bolt. In later years, they no longer had horses, but the rule still applied because there were also other reasons why they might want to prohibit the use of firecrackers. The explanation did not limit or negate the rule.   
    •   I would add the context of 2nd Amendment is ignored well as can read in the Declaration of Independence.
    • "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." Ahhh.  This is what I see being pretty much ignored in most conversations.  Does not "well-regulated mean that controls of some form, such as laws and such, are part of the right noted?  
  • Who's Online (See full list)

×