[quote=scaredyclassic]so say 51 percent, a majority of americans vote trump, but he loses due to electoral college fluke,

and they feel subjectively they are currently truly seriously oppressed and they feel their rights are really trampled on, for various reasons…but all very sincerely.[/quote]
Not much different than Al Gore, from what I remember. Yes, it may be time to abolish the electoral college..
[quote=scaredyclassic]
the 2nd am., as illuminated by the federalist papers, was intended to ensure that majorities are always armed and ready when they feel oppressed to revolt and the 2nd,am. says to you that they are justified to take their guns and start shooting politicians when they believe sincerely they are being oppressed?[/quote]Good try, but no it does not say the above. Making the wording of the statement such that they did – then attacking that false premise, is an invalid argument. It is known as a straw-man argument.

[quote=scaredyclassic]
its difficult to really see that in the text without guidance of the federalist papers:

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.
[/quote]
See what – remember that you started with a false premise, which is also a premise that I did not even take. What I have pointed out on this statement is that the word regulate means to control – always has. It has never been equivalent to outfit or supply.

[quote=scaredyclassic]
they certainly couldve thrown in a word like revolt or dethrone or something into such a convoluted sentence if theyd really really intended majorities to kill when they believe themselves oppressed.
[/quote]
You forgot my Thomas Jefferson quote on a little revolution. What I was pointing out above – and seemed to go right by you, was the mere fact that the public can arm themselves, is in itself a deterrent to abuse or tyranny.

[quote=scaredyclassic]
a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, and to overthrow such State when it becomef Intolerably Oppreffive, the right of the people individually and collectively, to keep and bear Arms, but not all arms, obviously, like crazy big arms, shall not be infringed, reasonable restrictions may apply, see state and federal authorities for details.[/quote]
Now imagine the rest of the constitution written as you proposed.. for example enumerating every race of people on earth instead of saying ‘all’. If you read those papers, you would understand that some of what you implied, goes without stating. That is why the terms ‘unalienable rights’ and ‘not infringed’ are there.

BTW, what is with the ‘s'(s)?? almost looks like using the old style use of ‘s'(ƒ), which looks like an ‘f’.