Missourian
Diamond Member
The ‘collective right’ argument was made in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), and rejected by the Court:The courts have ruled that gun bans are constitutional... Look up US v. Miller. And I would argue that the 2nd Amendment is about militias, not private gun ownerships. - a WELL REGULATED militia.
As the Court noted in Heller, Miller is not on point with the issue because the latter didn’t address the meaning of the Amendment, rather the type of firearms subject to its protection. In Heller the Court did not rule out gun regulation altogether, stating ownership was an individual right, along with the right to self defense. And because Americans overwhelming defend themselves with handguns, it was un-Constitutional to ban their possession.The right to bear arms is ‘clearly an individual right, having nothing whatever to do with service in a militia.’
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER
The issue isn’t gun regulation per se, but what type of regulation is excessive and what passes Constitutional muster.
Even if one subscribes to the living breathing document theory (which I don't)...it's hard to interpret "shall not be infringed" as anything but...well...shall not be infringed.