[Cicero]

On the whole, an excellent brief summary.

The basic point is that the right to bear arms was a prior right, not given by the Constitution but recognized as already existing by the Constitution.

In other words, the right of self-defense is another “inalienable” right, like the inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

This certainly was recognized in Natural Law theory that preceded and influenced the Constitution. These rights are inalienable because they are given by God and are basic to human nature as God created it.

It’s not as if the Constitution gave these rights, so it can as easily be amended to take them back. They are inalienable, meaning not only that no one can take them, but that no one can even voluntarily give them away.

[robertpaulsen]

"These rights are inalienable because they are given by God and are basic to human nature as God created it."

Which means all human beings have the right. Even if the person is an illegal in this country, we protect his inalienable right to life. Or a foreign visitor. Or a 3-year-old child.

But ... wait a minute. If the right to keep and bear arms is also a God-given inalienable right, don't these human beings also have it? Or did God only give it to certain people and not others?

Gosh. I'm confused. Are you sure having a gun is an inalienable right?

[logic]

In other words, the right of self-defense is another “inalienable” right, like the inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Absolutely correct! In fact, to amplify your thought, if the right to life is inalienable, then the right to defend (or keep) that same life must also be inalienable!!