From Largo:
[Copperud:] “To the best of my knowledge, there has been no change in the meaning of words or in usage that would affect the meaning of the amendment. If it were written today, it might be put: “Since a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged.’
From NYT:
Likewise, when the justices finish diagramming the Second Amendment, they should end up with something that expresses a causal link, like: Because a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
What’s the difference?