So she can state the state's position: "The proles must not be given the ability to fight back, or government will be doomed".
My pessimistic prediction - Peruta is overturned, SCOTUS declines to hear the case and the 2A is relegated to a very limited right to have A gun in your home, subject to whatever myriad restrictions are determined to be in the governments “best interest”.
After which, the good citizens of CA and other “may” issue (I call them “probably not” issue) states will have to decide if they are going to carry sans a permission slip from some government stooge (aka the county sheriff here in CA).
Evidently no one knows or speaks English language anymore and they completely forgot WHAT WORD MEANINGS ARE!!!
STUPID MORONS!!!
1887 Webster`s Dictionary:
to bear, bear v.t., 1. to support and move; or carry 2
“BEAR” = “CARRY”
[means to carry across state lines and ANYWHERE as my ancestors brought their own arms to Bunker Hill 1775 and to the Battle of Saratoga 1777 from Massachusetts, Vermont and New Hampshire —————]
TO BEAR [ARMS] “TO FURNISH ARM[S]” = ‘TO PROVISION FOR EFFECTIVE ACTION FOR OPERATION, ESPECIALLY IN WAR’ - Webster`s Dictionary 1887
TO KEEP = Definition of to “KEEP” ‘to preserve and maintain.. TO GUARD; DEFEND’
to “KEEP” `means NOT TO LET GO ONE`S POSSESSION OR CONTROL” Webster`s Dictionary 1887, p.460
Ergo GUN “Control” is implicitly illeal and contradictory to the Second Amendment