Very true.
But recent lower federal court decisions have made it clear that one must be associated with a militia to have the possession of that weapon protected by the second amendment.
Round you go again paulsen, trying to prove you point that our RKBA's is NOT being violated, -- by citing court decisions that violate it; -- can you get much more illogical in your thinking?
Without that association, there is no second amendment protection. (The 5th Circuit broke tradition). Without that association, your possession is protected only by your state constitution.
My RKBA's is being violated by my State, CA, -- and I, and thousands of my fellow citizens, have no recourse. We are outvoted by a tyranny of the majority, and the demented paulsens of this republic applaud.
You are grossly misstating my point.
I'm not talking about a "violation of rights". I'm talking about whether or not those rights are protected by the second amendment.
A RKBA not protected by the second amendment does not mean the right is being "violated" -- the right may be protected by one's state constitution.
"My RKBA's is being violated by my State, CA,"
There you go again with that word, "violated". Your RKBA is not protected by the state of California, true. But Nevada protects your right. If it's that important, move.