Originally Posted by cosmo20002
I don't know what all that is supposed to mean.
I'm asking you think--Does the 2nd Am guarantee a personal, private right to nuclear weapons?
I don't see how it is written that it necessarily denies them. Only thing I can see is that having them, even without fighting the govt, is not necessarily safe for keeping...in there it might not be that they can personally be born but have access.
A cannon on my front porch is a given though. Bombs from planes too. This is why we should be a citizen militia with a smaller standing army though. This way the people can have access to those nukes if needed, while keeping them safe otherwise.
"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."
Just a matter of where they are kept.
But why do you need "group think", that doesn't make something right or true. As usual, you resort to collectivist thinking.