[robertpaulsen]

Isn't it possible that the protection of an individual RKBA is found elsewhere? Bear in mind that the BOR was an afterthought -- that some thought it wasn't even necessary. Without a BOR, where were the citizens to find the protection of this important right?

How about this? An individual RKBA is protected by the state constitution, and the formation of an armed citizens militia is protected from federal infringement by the U.S. Constitution.

What a novel concept, yes? It's got federalism written all over it!

[groanup]

Isn't it possible that the protection of an individual RKBA is found elsewhere? Bear in mind that the BOR was an afterthought --

The BOR was enunciated to satisfy certain interests during the Constitutional process. The BOR also included a disclaimer that it was not to be perceived as the entire list of unalienable rights..., as I read the history.

[metalurgist]

Where then does the federal government get the power to restrict my choice of militia weapon as to rate of fire, magazine capacity, bayonets lugs, etc, etc.

My state constitution says "the right of the citizen to bear arms in defense self and the state shall not be questioned". The feds are clearly infringing on my rights and my state's rights with their demands for registration and restrictions on the type of firearm I need. >