Reply #22: SCOTUS addressed the issue in Heller and only a person who is comprehension-challenged can fail to

[jody]

understand that statement.

Page 19 of SCOTUS' decision on Heller:

c. Meaning of the Operative Clause. Putting all of these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation. This meaning is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment.We look to this because it has always been widely understood that the Second Amendment, like the First and Fourth Amendments, codified a pre-existing right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it “shall not be infringed.” As we said in United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 553 (1876), “his is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed . . . .”

ON EDIT ADD:
By referring to the First, Second, and Fourth Amendments, it’s clear that SCOTUS used "pre-existing right" in the same sense that PA and VT used “natural, inherent, inalienable/unalienable rights”.

A DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OR STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA - 28 Sept. 1776 "That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and inalienable rights, amongst which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."

A DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE STATE OF VERMONT- July 8, 1777
“I. THAT all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and unalienable rights, amongst which are the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.”

NOTE PA and VT statements differ only in the use of “inalienable” versus “unalienable”, a difference that occurred when the Declaration of Independence was written with Jefferson using “inalienable” and Adams using “unalienable”. Apparently Adams had the final say and the DOI used “unalienable”.