On Thursday 26 April 2007 7:32 pm, Ed Leafe wrote: > On Apr 26, 2007, at 8:19 PM, Leland F. Jackson, CPA wrote: > > I think that close enough to being a member of a well regulated > > Militia, even though I don't think the 2nd Amemdment to the > > Constitution > > hinges on the requirement of being a member of a well regulated > > Militia. > > I guess that they just threw that clause in there for no reason, > then? What then is the purpose of the inclusion of the first clause > of the 2nd Amendment?
Hi Ed! It made perfect sense at the time. At that time the militia was considered all of the people. -- Regards, Pete http://www.pete-theisen.com/ _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
