General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: "Guns Have Changed. Our Gun Laws Have Not Kept Pace." [View all]Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)and Alan Dershowitz -- no friends of 2A -- see it as recognizing an individual right, and so do most scholars of the Second. On ignorance: The bor deals with individual rights, not the right of governments, militia or other entity. The Articles describe militia powers; from there, the government announces in 2A why the RKBA is necessary within that larger encompassing right. It certainly doesn't condition it.
As I said, well regulated meant having a weapon suitable for the military and knowing how to use it. The gov has within its power to give "bearing" additional meaning as per Article 1. The right to bear is recognized by the feds, but the states reserve the power to regulate the manner so long as it does not run afoul of the Second or the 14th.
Look at it this way: The citizen can own weapons, but he/she better have one suitable for military service as required by Article 1. Frankly, outside of some NYT writers, I don't know many who continue to cling to such a stolid grammar to explain an amendment, or to such an oddball insertion of a conditional communitarian right amid a document replete with individual rights.