How you got that out of all the "unalienable Right" and "no free man shall be debarred the use of arms" is something only a Tibetan monk has the patience to contemplate.
You have still, after more than 1100 posts, not even come close to pointing out anything that gives any government the power to charge a person like in the lead article with a firearms possession crime.
Home owner.
In his home.
Openly carrying a firearm.
Legally purchased.
No criminal record on the home owners part.
The real criminal was INSIDE the mans house in his daughters room.
Not actively part of a State militia and therefore not subject to active militia regulation, even by your own sources and admission.
You remain sourceless, clueless, and brainless. Beg your idiot responses elsewhere.
He begged. Nothing about states, nothing about state regulation.
Poor you.
Plaintiffs not only seek to have this court declare the Gun Control Law unconstitutional without the requisite showing, but urge as a ground that the Gun Control Law violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The short answer to this contention is supplied in plaintiffs' own brief. As plaintiffs concede, it has been held that the Second Amendment is not a limitation upon the states. (Presser v. State of Illinois, 116 U.S. 252, 6 S.Ct. 580, 29 L.Ed. 615 [1886].) Further, the United States Supreme Court has declined to hold that the first ten amendments of the Constitution were all made applicable to the states through the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment. (Adamson v. People of State of California, 332 U.S. 46, 67 S.Ct. 1672, 91 L.Ed. 1903 [1947].) In the conceded absence of any contrary authority, the court rejects plaintiffs' claim that the Gun Control Law violates the Second Amendment.Grimm v. City of New York, 56 Misc.2d 525 (1968)
Poor, poor you.