This message was self-deleted by its author

[Glenn Vardy]

312. Collective and individual right comparison.

Really? Then what are these?

Pennsylvania: "That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination, to, and governed by, the civil power."

That's a militia provision. It's a collective right for the common defense.

In the same Declaration of Rights there is this right:
VIII. "That EVERY MEMBER of society hath a right TO BE PROTECTED in the enjoyment of life, liberty and property, and therefore is bound to contribute his proportion towards the expence OF THAT PROTECTION, and yield HIS PERSONAL SERVICE when necessary, or an equivalent thereto:... Nor can any man who is conscientiously scrupulous of BEARING ARMS, be justly compelled thereto, if he will pay such equivalent."

There was an almost identical provision in Vermont.

Notice that they KNEW how to refer to each individual and could have used similar suitable terms to refer to individuals in the arms bearing provisions IF they intended those provisions to secure a right to carry guns for self defense.
Notice that they don't contain the word "keep."