Spats, how do you arrive at #2? I'd have thought that in a very general sense, the law (and certainly the Constitution) assumes that it's OK not to do anything that's not compulsory -- but that doesn't prohibit passing laws that do make certain things compulsory . Wouldn't the Militia Acts of 1792 have been unconstitutional if the Second Amendment included the right
not to keep and bear arms, insofar as they required men of militia age to own muskets/rifles and other necessary equipment?
And if the First Amendment encompasses a right not to speak, why would it have been necessary to spell out a right not to incriminate oneself in the Fifth?
