[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.

[tpaine]

paulsen admits an infringement:

The National Firearms Act of 1934 infringed just a little, wouldn't you say?

Previously, you've defended the NFA of '34 as an authorized use of Commerce clause power. -- Now you admit it's an infringement in order to justify earlier ones:

Plus, numerous states and cities had laws against the carrying of concealed weapons in the 1800's.

They had 'laws', - repugnant infringements on the right to carry, -- and most still do - just as you democrats like it.

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>The National Firearms Act of 1934 infringed just a little, wouldn't you say?<<<

Only a little. This was the first infringement by the Federal Government (the proverbial "foot in the door"); but it was not until the Gun Control Act of 1968 that there was any noticable infrigement.