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.”

The Second Amendment to the U.S.A. Constitution

soon we'll be updating 2017. In the meantime below is a link for 2016 numbers

Check THE TRACE 2016 statistic results for gun violence

The number of American soldiers who died in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were 6,845, while the death toll as a result of gun violence from 2005 to 2015 was 301,000. You do the math.

Statutory interpretation is the process by which courts interpret and apply legislation. The four rules used for interpretation are the literal rule, the golden rule, the mischief rule and the purposive approach. ”

Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)British logician and philosopher

understanding "interpretation"

. . . while applying critical thought in the argument about the Second Amendment

assuming everybody knows what is a postulate . . . or axioms

an example:

"Nothing can both be and not be at the same time and in the same respect."

Got it?

As a result, the statutory interpretation of the Second Amendment will continue to be, because of the two or more "asserted or assumed" propositions to be true, just because of , their "being so . . ."

We dare say we found a literal rule: the political correct way of continuing to fight for the constitutional right to bear arms, using the concept of interpretation when defending the Second Emendment, in which the nation must have a militia (while ignoring the fact that we have the most powerful militia in the planet which is in itself is a literal rule for sure . . . ) to defend itself! Although it is clear to all, the militia is composed of its nationals (a golden rule . . . because, who else would join the arm forces? Mercenaries? )The argument is: Unless, if the most powerful militia in this planet has no members (definitively and admittedly , a mischief rule !) , then all the bravado citizens will have to defend the nation! Which in a sense, can be concluded as the ultimate "purposive approach"?

Hum . . . then, as a "deduction": let's stock up in machine guns & assault riffles to protect the "free nation"? Although, I'm sure, a regular gun would be enough "to defend" your family from thieves . . .

But then . . . billions of $$$$ wouldn't happen, right?

Dichotomy & paradox: in order to reach the "bottom-line" we must continue to live under the rock bottom of gun violence!

On the other hand, thanks to "interpretation" how many nuts have been killing their wives, girlfriends, children and plain massive killings, by the hundredth of thousands . . . just because of being so.