Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WeedWacker
I really have nothing against him owning a firearm, I believe all free men should. I just don't see it as he doesn't meet the criteria per the second and the definition of militia. Or am I thinking too much again?
|
Even if you didn't understand the 2nd Amendment (which it appears you don't), a read of the decisions in
Heller and (especially)
McDonald makes it crystal clear that the RKBA protected by the 2nd Amendment is in no way predicated on service in a militia, or on anything else. It also imposes no requirement to be a citizen.
To say that a legal resident alien has no 2A right to keep and bear arms is equivalent to saying that he also has no 1A right to freedom of speech, no 4A right to security against warrantless and baseless searches and seizures, and no 5A protection against being required to make self-incriminating statements.
That dawg don't hunt.