SR> During the Spring Semester, I took a class on 
 SR> Government, and learned something
 SR> I am surprised I never heard before.
 SR> There has been a lot of talk about the "right to 
 SR> bear arms" and such.  "You
 SR> can't take my guns, I have a Constitutional right to it".  I find it
 SR> interesting that the Supreme Court has NEVER 
 SR> interpreted the Second Amendment
 SR> as an individual's right to own firearms.  It has 
 SR> ALWAYS interpreted it as the
 SR> right of a state to have a militia (National Guard).  
 SR> If a city wishes to, they can even outlaw firearms 
 SR> within their city limits. 
 SR> It has been done, and is Constitutional!  
 SR> I'm surprised I did not hear this BEFORE my Senior year in college :)
 
Hi Sean,
 
I'm not surprised that your course work included this particular 
interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. And you are correct that many of th 
the justices that have sat on the cases that you have mentioned have 
expressed that opinion, however, that particular aspect, whether or not RTKBA 
is an individual right, has never been actually passed upon per se. Indeed, 
in the recent strikedown of the Brady mandated background checks (on a 10th 
Amendment challenge), Justice Clarence Thomas noted that he would be 
surprised if the authors of the constitution would have meant individuals 
when using the term "the people" in the 1st Amendment (and others), but not 
individuals when using the same term in the 2nd. Additionally, Justice Thomas 
seemed to be inviting someone to bring a 2nd Amendment case before the court.
 
Also, since you are obviously educated, albeit liberally, if you take the 
rules of grammer and apply them carefully to the 2nd, you will find that the 
second part of that sentence is in no way dependent upon the first part for 
its meaning. ....the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be 
infringed" stands complete and by itself. 
 
I firmly believe that logic dictates that 1) it is better tha the people be 
armed, 2) it is constitutional that they be armed, and 3) that to do  
otherwise would be to play into the hands of criminals and know-nothing 
liberals who believe that they know better how to rule us than we do 
ourselves. You will note that the last statement flies in the face of the 
founder's oft stated belief that the people ought to rule themselves.
 
Do a little research, do a little reading, do a lot of thinking .
 
I look forward to your next post.
 
jackson
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------