General Off-Topic Board / Re: Second Amendment Debate- What does the "right to bear arms" really mean?« on: March 19, 2008, 11:23:45 AM »
I guess that is up for interpretation! I consider an 'arm' to be an arming mechanism, and bullets and ammunition are already secondary elements.QuoteYes, armed militia resistance defeated the British. I thank you for clarifying that they had bullets as well, I was about to assume that they had defeated the British simply with bayonets. They had arms, and they had bullets. Thank you for clarifying.No... armed militia did not have "Arms and Bullets". They had "Guns and Bullets". Or as the phrase is traditionally, commonly, and correctly applied: They bore arms.
Edit: Who talks like that? "Yeah I bought some arms and bullets at the gun shop the other day."Did the framers talk like that? If they did not specifically say rifles or guns in the constitution, maybe the framers intended for common citizens to have cannon, rockets and missiles.