"Why do you need an AR15?"

[stanc]

Stan, You disappoint me. The source you cite is only one of several available.

Try this one:

While drafting the Bill of Rights, James Madison drew heavily on the Virginia Declaration of Rights, written by George Mason...

:confused: That confirms what I previously wrote: Madison drafted (wrote/authored/created) the Bill of Rights, and was strongly influenced by Mason.

Further reading within the same site reveals the following legal analysis of the 2nd Amendment (emphasis mine):

The right to bear arms in a lawful manner with regard to self-protection; firearms covered under the 2nd Amendment do not address service within the Militia.

:confused: The 2nd Amendment does not say anything about individual self defense. It only addresses collective defense (i.e., defense of the state).

Madison, himself, offered insight into what he originally intended Article 2 to mean when he spoke to the First Congress and introduced the Bill of Rights. There, he states the following:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country; but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

This initial draft clearly shows the two concepts of individual rights to bear arms and state militias receiving separate and independent attention.

No. It shows that in order for a "well armed and well regulated militia" to have its individual members bring their own weapons with them when reporting for duty, they must be allowed to own and carry said weapons.

And even if the concepts had received "separate and independent attention" in that initial draft, since it was not adopted, it doesn't matter. What counts is the final draft, and it links the two aspects.

The Federalist Papers lend further insight into the minds of the people, during that time. Of particular noteworthiness is Federalist Paper 46, written by James Madison, which offer a more detailed look into the views regarding the arming of the citizens of a country which had just won its liberty from oppressive rule.

Within 46, it becomes apparent that Madison was concerned with the Federal Government becoming too much like the English Monarchy it had just replaced. In it, he calculates what he sees as the size of a Federal Army needed to protect the country from foreign aggressors, and still remaining small enough (30,000 soldiers) so as not to threaten the security of the individual states. In order to protect the states from being overpowered by the Federal Government, the states were to be allowed a combined militia of 500,000 people.

The theme that the people need to safeguard themselves from an oppressive government runs through these documents, repeatedly.

And yet the idea that the people should have arms for the purpose of overthrowing the government is conspicuously absent from both the Constitution and Bill of Rights.