Militia Raid

Can anyone explain how you jive this:

“We classify these groups as violent and anti-government,” said Jim Cavanaugh, who supervises the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives operations in portions of the South. “They stockpile things and live off a fear, a paranoia they’re going to need weapons and explosives because some event is going to happen when they will need them.”

With this?

ARTICLE II: 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.

Bueller?  Bueller?

3 Comments

  1. Lukosrage says:

    Simple lead, inbreading and some alcohol in his blood-surrogate.

  2. R says:

    Well, it depends on what the definition of “well regulated” is.

  3. Phelps says:

    Doesn’t matter at all, that is simply explanitory. The operative clause is “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

    Say we had a net neutrality amendment. (Not debating that subject, just an example.) If the amendment said, “the free exchange of academic and political knowledge being necessary to an informed populace, the right of net nuetrality shall not be infringed.” That wouldn’t make it OK to infringe net neutrality as long as the traffic wasn’t sufficiently political or academic.

    (And “well regulated” meant, at the time of the formation, meant 31337 and full of pwnage. See, you can tell it is authentic 18th century 13375p33k because no one uses the leading 3 anymore.)