We can hope that Donald Trump continues to succeed in appointing constitutionalist judges at all levels of the federal judiciary. Even the 9th Circuit court, not known for conservative opinion, is now balanced enough to rule against California's magazine limits as unconstitutional. A caution on this decision, however, as the rule had little to do with the 2nd amendment, and more to do with the unlawfulness of ex post facto law. The way the restriction was written automatically labeled any current owner of large capacity magazines a criminal, even though the purchase prior to the law was legal.

It will be interesting to see if the federal bump stock ban meets a similar challenge, as it essentially makes all owners of such stocks criminals. The phrasing, however, implies that no turn in of the items is required, but the use of them to mimic automatic fire is unlawful.

We're not out of the woods yet, but a Trump 2020 victory will make it hard for opponents of the 2nd amendment to make much headway for decades.

From what I can tell, the second amendment was to prevent governments (like the english government) from disarming the populace to maintain its crooked power. We need the guns we have now to give OUR present government pause before they go totally off the rails against us.

"regulated" in terms of the Second Amendment referred to "in good working order", meaning that the members of the militia were to properly maintain and know how to use their individual weaponry so that they could be effective if an event arose. It had nothing to do with "government" passing laws or "regulations".

One correction: "They believe others [should] take care of them..."

Obligation is everything. Ability has nothing to do with it.

Yes, you are starting to sound like me, AJ...laughing...sick and tired of humanoids that refuse to or cannot grow up.

I would agree and elaborate. The only "regulated"would be in a time of need which still leaves the people as a whole to be the militia.

I think, and it's entirely my opinion, that regulated and militia were adjectives to convey how citizens must conduct themselves to legitimately enact force.Without regulation and structure you simply have a mob.

It's less that they are thick and more that they are sick, mentally. They have a serf mentality. They believe others can take care of them and differ the safety and prosperity of their existence to others. The morons scarcely deserve to exist let alone live in a nation intended for individualists.

Thank you AJ, saving that one...but do you really think a liberal's thick headedness could possibly understand that.

There was no standing army (other than the British) at the time so in my opinion, that only leaves the people as a whole to be the militia.

They trouble is the "they". Then it becomes who are 'they' to 'consider' for me, you and anyone else, no? They certainly do not pause to 'consider' in any event.

The Magna Carta, not to mention the Constitution, is certainly ignored these days, and the decline of the West makes it evident.

I think the defining words are 'of the people'. They need to consider this.

I suspect there are now more than a few militia battalions of men and women over 60 able and willing to serve to defend individual liberty.