[pbs911]

This is an issue I follow fairly closely. The real issue is whether the "right to bear arms" in the 2nd Amendmanet is whether that confers a Consitutional right upon the individual or whther it confers a right upon the States. If the latter, the States would have a right to regluate an individuals rights to gun ownership.

It also doesn't make any sense in relation to the "militia" language in the second part of the sentence. If the States can regulate its people then there is no way for the people to raise a militia against the State governement that controls the rights of its citizens. This would necessarily result in tyrany at the State level. This is exactly what the founding fathers wanted to protect against by including the 2nd amendment in the bill of rights.

My .02