[robertpaulsen]

"Nothing in the Constitution was intended to give the feds any power to disarm the people (or prohibit any inanimate objects)"

I forget the exact court case, but the judge made a salient point. He said the natural state of commerce was free and unfettered. ANY regulation, therefore, was a restriction.

So the power to regulate is the power to restrict, even to the point of prohibition.

[ctdonath2]

“shall not be infringed.”

[ctdonath2]

Then why did Prohibition require a Constitutional amendment?