Quit asking. I already did. See my post #315. It only protected people in the militia collective. And please don't say that the 1776 Virginia State Constitution therefore implies that it was illegal for everyone else, including 85-year-old women.
"Furthermore, your claim that a narrowing of the class constituting "the people" creates a collective"
It's an individual right which applies to a particular group of people collectively. It's like the right of "the people" to assemble or the right of "the people" to vote. It's an individual right which applies to a particular group of people collectively.
I call that a collective right. I don't care what you call it. You know what I mean.
Your circular reasoning is making me dizzy.
First you claim that the "people" in the Second Amendment is a collective consisting of only the militia.
Then you end up using as support the quote from the Virginia Constitution: "That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free State".
But the full quote is as follows: "That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".
Here was a perfect opportunity to protect the right of the militia, composed of the body of the people, to keep and bear arms. BUT IT DIDN'T. Whatever the "body of the people" consisted of which formed the militia, that is not whose right to keep and bear arms was protected.
The reason I asked about the 85-year-old woman's protection in Virginia, is because it is presently enforceable by her in the courts of Virginia. Yet the protection has remained virtually the same since the founding of our nation. Do you think extending the vote to woman included protection for their right to keep and bear arms? Was it the Fourteenth Amendment which extended state protection of the right to keep and bear arms to women? Or is there absolutely no evidence whatever that the language used in the Virginia Constitution does and always has protected the right of women to keep and bear arms?
I most certainly do not know what you mean, if you use the "collective right" nonsense to refer to anything other than the ignorant claims by tyrannical courts that no individual has standing to challenge gun laws using their protection which is explicit in the Second Amendment.
You persisted in previous discussions to insist that the Supreme Court's Miller decision could free Miller and yet not be an "individual right" decision. You persisted in trying to claim that it was the shotgun that was protected. Words have meaning. You can't just adopt any meaning you want.