Re: Kiddie exercises his right to bear arms

"Don Homuth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:26:08 -0800, "Kevin C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >Don, nothing you've pointed out here counteracts "The right of the people
to
> >keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
>
> It's all just the one sentence.
>
 I freely admit I'm not a constitutional expert.  Correct me if I'm wrong,
but amendments 1-10 is the our bill of rights.  These are meant to be
individual rights, not rights of the state government.  Why would the second
amendment in a group of 10 amendments that spell out individual rights be
only for the state?
<snip>

> The US Constitution is silent on all local militias, save the one
> specifically referred to within the body of it.  Unless you are of the
> opinion that the terms State and Militia mean one thing in the body,
> but quite another in the Second Amendment.
>
> They don't.

Seems that if I follow your logic on this, I can prove my point as well.  If
"the people" in amendments I, IV, IX, and X means your everyday average
citizen, then it must mean the same thing in the second amendment.  It does
not say 'the right of the people to keep and bear arms, when in the service
of the state run militia, shall not be infringed.'

-Kevin C.