"although the 2nd Amendment guarantees the individual the right to own guns,the federal government still reserves the right to place reasonable restrictions on that right".
I prefer to hope for this as a bright spot in the Bush administration, since the JD supports, at least rhetorically, the individual right to keep and bear arms.
(I see reasonable regulation as including the possession of nuclear weapons and other WMD - drawing the bright margin line, well...)
In specific defense of Ashcroft - I think he defended not keeping a national database of gun owners.
That doesn't apply,since the 2nd Amendment only recogonizes the right of the INDIVIDUAL citizen to possess the weapons normally posessed by the INDIVIDUAL infantryman. "Armed" was a term than meant individual arms,NOT crew-served weapons,or TRUE weapons of mass destruction such as nukes,bio,or chemical weapons. The purpose of this was to insure the infantry militia showed up when called,already armed and ready to go. Because of expense,mobility,and the practical concern that one central rally point was needed,it was generally accepted that the milita heavy weapons such as cannons would be kept in the possession of the local authorities. These were the crew-served weapons of the day.
BTW,PLEASE note that NOTHING written above FORBIDS the possession of crew-served weapons,or even TRUE weapons of mass destruction. It just doesn't recogonize their possession as a RIGHT.