[mountn man]

Militias are made up of the body of people of a state, that is who the "people" the second referes to, not people in an ordinary sense.

Prove it.

If you are correct, then every where the Bill of Rights mentions "the people" would imply the exact same thing that you're saying the second says about "the people".

Never in the wording of the BOR do the authors stipulate a change in the meanings of people or persons.

Since no change is ever stipulated, the same respect to wording has to be given equally each and every time.

So by your definition, YOU don't have the freedom of speech. YOU don't have the right to a speedy trial. And on and on. But the state does.

[AZRepublican]

> Prove it. I think I did with the link to the federalist article on the ruling. Paul Madison quotes the conventions talking of the "body of the people" who were trained in arms.

If you are correct, then every where the Bill of Rights mentions "the people" would imply the exact same thing that you're saying the second says about "the people".

The bill of rights is all about the "rights of the people" to be free of Congress abridging the freedom of speech, disarming state militias, soldiers quartered in any house, etc. It did not oust the States bill of rights.