RyanH, first, I did not get those from the NRA website, second, yes I have researched them and if you notice at the end of each quote there is a reference. Ahhh, but wait a minute you would have known that if you had read them.
BTW, not all of the quotes dealt with firearms. And all most certainly dealt with the individual right to freedom and its protectioin.
Second, the Constitution is not meant to be interpreted, it is meant as a literal document and to be taken as such. The writings of the founding fathers are clear as crystal.
You my friend are an ignorant liberal. Let us look at just one quote:
Samuel Adams:
"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." During Massachusetts' U.S. Constitution ratification convention, (1788), Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)
How is this to be interpreted any differently than it was in 1788?
Edmund Burke:
"The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion." Speech at County Meeting of Bucks, 1784
Edmund Burke:
"The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts." Letter to the Sheriffs of Bristol, April 3, 1777
Albert Gallatin:
"The whole of the Bill of Rights is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." Letter by Albert Gallatin to Alexander Addison, Oct. 7, 1789, MS. in N.Y. Hist. Soc. _A.G. Papers, 2.
Benjamin Franklin:
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
and what do you make of the above.
And for the following how can this be taken any other way than what is written. Well, I am sure you will say something like it means the National Guard or something like that. But, again remember, the NG is a standing army of which the founding fathers were quite against. But they also recognized that one might out of necessity need to be formed even given its inherent dangers to the people of the nation.
Alexander Hamilton:
"This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidible to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist." Federalist Papers, Article 29 January 10, 1788
James Madison:
"The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by [State] governments possessing their affections and confidence." Federalist Papers, Article 46 January 29, 1788
and refute the above.
Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
