[Luis Gonzalez]

The "well-trained" argument falls right into Tribe's logic. Once again arguing that "well-trained" describes an organized militia, organized by the State government, A State Militia, "being necessary to the security of a free State" places the right to bear arms on the State (the people).

I'll tell you, he's a Lib, but his logic is scary once you read it.

I believe that in order to defeat them, you need to know them. Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.

[He Rides A White Horse]

You mean this guy?

Both Laurence Tribe (16) and the Illinois team of Nowak, Rotunda, and Young (17) at least acknowledge the existence of the Second Amendment in their respective treatises on constitutional law, perhaps because the treatise genre demands more encyclopedic coverage than does the casebook. Neither, however, pays it the compliment of extended analysis. Both marginalize the Amendment by relegating it to footnotes; it becomes what a deconstructionist might call a "supplement" to the ostensibly "real" Constitution that is privileged by discussion in the text (18) . Professor Tribe's footnote appears as part of a general discussion of congressional power. He asserts that the history of the Amendment "indicate[s] that the central concern of [its] framers was to prevent such federal interferences with the state militia as would permit the establishment of a standing national army and the consequent destruction of local autonomy."

Sounds like another liberal trying to dictate to the rest of us what the Constitution "really" means.

I say let him and his ilk come for our Constitutionally guaranteed right. He'll learn what it really means.

[He Rides A White Horse]

at least acknowledge the existence of the Second Amendment in their respective treatises on constitutional law

How very generous of them!

[He Rides A White Horse]

Now, I am not trying to sound belligerent, but I quickly read through some of what he had to say. It sounds like nothing more to me than the usual "I'll make a pronouncement, now defend against my statements" (which of course are etched in stone).