> The 2nd amendment is one sentence meaning that the thoughts expressed in it are, ahhhhh, related... That's the way the English language works.

True, but that one sentence is ambiguous:

"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."

Interpretation 1 (restrictive): "A well-regulated militia is necessary, so the people are allowed to bear arms only as members of that militia."

Interpretation 2 (nonrestrictive): "The right of the people to bear arms is fundamental, and one of the things they need to do is form a well-regulated militia; but regardless, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed."

The Supreme Court, which knows more about the historical context and Constitutional law than I do, has plumped for door No. 2. Since it's less restrictive, it grants less power to the feds and more to the people. That makes it (wait for it)...

"liberal."