Replies

And in the view of most so-called "progressives," the Second Amendment only applies to the National Guard, not to individuals.

Therefore, since the 2nd. Amendment protects the "right of the people to keep and bear ams", this then protects the "right" of the National Guard to keep and bear arms"? I don't think so. Government does not have rights. Individuals do. Government has powers. And duties. In this case, government is charged with protecting the rights of individuals, not diminishing those that exist, or assuming powers it does not have.

It's a facetious argument. The National Guard is part of the U.S. Military. It doesn't have "rights" any more than the Army or the Navy do. They have powers under the Constitution, but not rights. And, of course, if "the people" of the 2nd Amendment really means the National guard, then the 4th Amendment should really be read as...

The right of The National Guard to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the Guard personnel or things to be seized.