Originally posted by swampfoxh:
So, the militia is not actually an instrumentality of the state so much as it is "us" defending our homes and families against all threats to our security including those that emanate from the government itself. So, also, we may possess helicopter gunships with electric cannon, so that we may defend ourselves from an armored cavalry regiment sent by an oppressive government. it would be folly to think that we could do that with a musket or a Winchester .270.
The Constitution places no limits on the right to "keep and bear" arms. The US Constitution is not about limits on We the People but about limits placed on the Federal Government. Thus, the Constitution does not limit you in the rate of fire or destructiveness of arms you may "keep and bear". The Courts do this with its rulings, and they know completely well they are in violation of the Constitution.
We do not live under the Rule of Law anymore, but under Policies, Codes, Executive orders, etc. with many in direct violation of the Rule of Law.
To be able to oppose domestic tyranny head on, one must be equally trained and armed as the forces of tyranny. Otherwise a head on confrontation would only lead to unneccessary deaths. The Anti-Federalists of the founding understood this well. The 2nd is their way of addressing this problem.
