View Single Post
Old December 31, 2012, 03:54 PM   #83
Senior Member
Join Date: June 24, 2008
Posts: 2,135
The key here is "well regulated militia", while I believe they would have expected/required/desired the militia to have equivalent arms, they also had an expectation that the militia was regulated, not simply citizens with arms. I believe that is where the 2nd amendment is weak as it pertains to civilian privileges of arms, and subsequently is at risk.
Again, direct from Heller, page 1:

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.
While the Supreme Court decision DC v Heller didn't settle every 2nd Amendment issue, it settled lots of them. If it did, there's no sense in rehashing them again.
natman is offline  
Page generated in 0.03395 seconds with 7 queries