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.
You're turning "original intent" on its head. The fact that machine guns didn't exist in 1792 doesn't mean they are subject to government control. It means that they aren't.
You're take on original intent would saddle us with protection for muskets but not for modern self-loading handguns.
Similarly, original intent regarding "the people" and the right to keep and bear arms would include anybody who had an enforceable right to self defense. Once the courts brush away the "collective rights" nonsense and the idea that "the right of the people" is simply a right of a militia or the right of a state, what remains is an individual right to keep and bear arms for one's self, one's family, one's community, and one's nation.