How did we go from "well regulated", which means able to march as a group and keep internal order, all the way to "state regulated"?
Intellectual corruption.
It appears that the supreme court is recognizing that DC is claiming that the Second Amendment only covers state regulated militias, and that is not the only definition of a militia.
I think that wording may be telling us that the Supreme Court is skeptical of that interpretation.
OK, eagle eyed one....
So given the change in the definition of scope (much narrower) do you see a direction here? The direction (away from individual right) and skewed focus is not a good sign, is it? Here’s hoping the 2A attorney will point that out, and refocus on the Constitutional meaning...
Even more. How did we go from a militia which is a citizen army to a national guard which is an extension of the standing professional army the Founders feared.
I see the Second Amendment making two explicit declarations. (1) The people can form a well regulated militia. (2) The right to keep and bear arms is absolute; it shall not be infringed.
What we never get are the arguments used by the Founders to arrive at the Second Amendment. We need some light on its origin. We also need to ask the gun controllers why they fear guns. To me is simply a fear of people who have the power to defend themselves against the will of the controllers. Their underlying motive needs to be exposed. The controllers all seem to have an itch to control others.
Whenever I hear one say they believe in helping others through politics, I never cease to be amazed how often their hands are reaching into my back pocket telling me to behave and help the downtrodden.
Unlike Charlton Heston, I'm not going to fight to the death and have them pry my gun from my cold dead hands. Instead, I'm going to my warm body to modernize the Guillotine.