Should the 2d Amendment be amended to remove the confusing first phrase?

Why is the 2nd always truncated ?
Well regulated militia doesn't confuse me.
Until the recent supreme Court decision to overturn 200 yrs of precedent it well understood .
Just listen to Reagan if you don't understand
But the answer to 200 mass shootings a year is not more guns .
But there is so much emotions because the politicians want to be afraid .
Every year I heard Obama was coming for your guns .
And the gullible bought more
Year after year.
Of course now it will be polosi is after your guns so you'll buy more ammo
With your fear logic gets shioved to the side

Leave it as it is!
If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
I have full faith and support for our Founding Fathers ideas and ideals about this Country.
It has worked since its inception and only the IGNORANT, LOW LIFE, LIBERAL, PROGRESSIVE, SOCIALIST, COMMUNIST PUKES are the ones who want to change the Constitution and we all lived through what obama did to this Country so those types are the only ones raising hell about wanting it changed. You've described it pretty well, and probably would have been "honestly engaged" back in the early 1900's, but just leave it be.

i believe the 9th covers that also

NO! JUST NO, you would only be opening the door for more amendments until that right was removed. We already have lost some freedom of choice because people won't defend it.

Nothing confusing about it!
What other amendments do you wish to 'alter' to 'remove the confusion'? That's the pandora's box you would be opening. Just cuz it's 'uncomfortable' for some folks doesn't mean it needs changed. Other than the War of 1812, can you think of any other time the Continental US has ever been invaded? I can't. Then consider why that is.

It would take a convention of the states to change the Constitution and that would open the opportunity to the anti-gunners who would abolish the Second Amendment.

The Federalist Papers clearly states the reasons for the present wording. When written, militia was an honorable association of citizens that would, as the Minute Men, take up arms to defend the country from invasion or insurrection. It is only recently that it has become associated with fringe groups. Leave it alone. Too much danger that the anti gun crowd will water it down and take away its teeth.

In light of the passage of new gun control in my former home state of Washington. I am outraged that the leftists think that the laws they don't like are okay to violate and only those rights they support are enshrined. I am an Old Marine and to have some one deem that I need to be trained on weapons handling to be allowed to purchase a weapon is ludicrous. It's almost as insulting as having a sitting Senator deem me a potential threat because of my service. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed means that we don't need anyone's permission and we are entitled arm ourselves as we see fit. I hope that it won't come to armed conflict but I will not relinquish my weapons, my oath to defend the constitution has no expiration date and I'll shoot back.

Absolutely not. People should be more educated as to what it means.



https://www.upcounsel.com/lectl-the-second-amendment-the-framers-intentions

A Constitutional Convention would turn into a nightmare, with every lunatic socialist-globalist left-wing Kook coming out of the woodwork (like the cockroaches they are), demanding the end of our basic rights. No, please. You think the Kavanaugh hearings were bad? This would be ten times worse.