A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms

[chicagogeorge]

Originally Posted by nvxplorer

Bull. Read a history book. Get your head out of rightwing radio, TV and websites. Here, I'll get you started: District of Columbia v. Heller – Case Brief Summary There is absolutely nothing in those briefs that comes close to what you are claiming.

Not sure what your point is for bring the Heller decision up but from your own link

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

Furthermore, your statement is false on its face, as the rights you are referring to were not in the Constitution at the time the 2nd Amendment was being drafted. Why do so many rightwingers think The Bill of Rights was part of the original Constitution?

The Anti-Federalists (and States Rights proponents) would not have ratified the Constitution if a Bill of Rights which specifically protected the right of individuals was not added.

In, in a December 1787 letter to Madison called the omission of a Bill of Rights a major mistake: "A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth."

The Bill of Rights: Its History and its Significance

[gunlover]

Originally Posted by chicagogeorge

Not sure what your point is for bring the Heller decision up but from your own link





The Anti-Federalists (and States Rights proponents) would not have ratified the Constitution if a Bill of Rights which specifically protected the right of individuals was not added.


The Bill of Rights: Its History and its Significance

Great post..