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?
Yes, in the current constitution. The 1776 Virginia State Constitution read (in full):
"SEC. 13. 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; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided, as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power."
It protects an an armed Militia but says nothing about individual rights. That was what you asked for. That was what I gave you. Address THAT and quit playing your gotcha games.
"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."
I've already agreed with you on that. But I thought you were interested in the definition of "the people" in the second amendment back in 1792? Not when it doesn't suit you, I guess. You'd rather discuss the 2007 version of the Virginia State Constitution.
Screw original intent and original meaning and even what the constitution says. You feel everyone's rights should be protected by the second amendment so therefore they are.