[PhilipFreneau]

>>>I'm not so sure that was the reason given. It is the Militia wording which gives it a collective meaning. It could have been that inserting "for the common defence" would have merely been redundant and unnecessary.<<<

Certainly the Founding Fathers strived to avoid redundancy. For example, they did not mention this is a Christian Nation because that would have been redundant. But to believe a collective meaning for the 2nd, when our history (until the late 1960's) demonstrated virtually no infringement of the RKBA by either the federal or state governments, is analogous to believing the Tooth Fairy. Do you believe in the Tooth Fairy, Robert?

[Mojave]

our history (until the late 1960's) demonstrated virtually no infringement of the RKBA by either the federal or state governments

Pennsylvania passed its Test Act in 1777 which barred ownership of firearms by anyone who had not taken a loyalty oath to the state. That covered about 40% of the white male population.

Pesky old historical facts.

[Mojave]

You gotta envy 'em. When they need a fact, they simply invent it.

[robertpaulsen]

"But to believe a collective meaning for the 2nd, when our history (until the late 1960's) demonstrated virtually no infringement of the RKBA by either the federal or state governments, is analogous to believing the Tooth Fairy. Do you believe in the Tooth Fairy, Robert?"

Neither the Tooth Fairy nor PhilipFreneau.

The National Firearms Act of 1934 infringed just a little, wouldn't you say? Plus, numerous states and cities had laws against the carrying of concealed weapons in the 1800's.