03-04-2018, 05:12 PM
98Z Wrote:It's in that 157-page Supreme Court decision I linked for you. You can find it. It's in there.I didn't ask where that statement is located in the Supreme Court decision.
I asked you to show me where you see anything remotely resembling this...
Quote:the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home,...
...in the Second Amendment?
Quote:A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Can't do it, can you, because it isn't there. The Second Amendment only addresses collective defense, like the RKBA of North Carolina, Virginia, and Massachusetts:
North Carolina (1776) "...the people have a right to bear arms, for the defence of the State..."
Virginia (1776) "...a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free state..."
Massachusetts (1780) "The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence."
If the Second Amendment was meant to also cover individual defense unrelated to militia service, it seems like it would've explicitly said so, like the RKBA of Pennsylvania and Vermont:
Pennsylvania (1776) "...the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state..."
Vermont (1777) "...the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State..."
