> As far as I can see, the 1791 Second Amendment pertained to the right of the States to uphold a "well-regulated Militia" (a standing army of citizens specially trained to arms), for the defense of the country against foreign military aggressors. That's ALL. I find it bizarre that anyone could so flagrantly abuse that intent, by wringing the idea of a private "individual's right to bear arms for any reason" out of that Amendment. What were Delaware and Nevada thinking when they further specified, "A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and State, and for hunting and recreational use."
>
> My Dave (ahem) mentions a Duckman episode which perhaps expresses the irony better than I can. Duckman, in this case, causes a temporal anomaly with his clock radio. Ben Franklin takes the opportunity to come forward in time, and express commentary on the present U.S. Constitution... "Number 1! Freedom of Speech applies to everyone -- *no exceptions*. Number 2! The Second Amendment *doesn't* mean guns for everyone. What did you think we were, stupid?"
>
> Wolf "my 2¢'s worth" spirit

It's short enough to quote in its entirety without hassle:

"A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Initially, the amendments only applied to the federal level of government. States could strengthen or weaken it, abolish it or enshrine it. The fourteenth amendment, however, says the states can't deny equal protection of the laws, and that extended the bill of rights to state laws as well. Now, since the second amendment applies universally everywhere in the country, it is in fact, "guns for everyone," with the obvious exceptions of felons, who forfeit several rights including this one. The part about the "well-regulated militia" is the reason given, but the actual right applies to the people, not the state, for the reason I previously mentioned.

gab"History takes weird turns"by