Top Two Reasons to Own a Gun

I don’t totally disagree with you.

OTOH, just imagine how bad it would be without the Second Amendment?

My home town still has the Colonial powder house sitting atop (strangely enough) Powder House Hill.

I agree!

My home town still has the Colonial powder house sitting atop (strangely enough) Powder House Hill.

I tried to google it to find a picture, but no luck. I assume you are from South Berwick. I don't know of any powderhouses still standing near me. I live just west of Harrisburg, PA and this area of PA was settled in the mid 1700's. (At least that was when towns started to become incorporated.

OTOH, just imagine how bad it would be without the Second Amendment?

Hm, not that leads to a good question: do we really have a 2nd Amendment?
Let me start with an illustration of the problem, rather than a proof, starting with city and going to state and then federal.

New Mexico State Constitution Sec. 6. [Right to bear arms.] No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms. (As amended November 2, 1971 and November 2, 1986.)

In my hometown (Las Cruces, NM) there are posted on all the municipal (and county) courthouses signs declaring that weapons are prohibited and that violators will be prosecuted. Unless there is a state statute, then this is a blatant case of those entities flouting the State Constitution's prohibition to do so, for the judiciary is part of the municipality (or county) which is explicitly barred from regulating it. If there is a state statute, then it is legal nullity, for to prosecute it, is to have a law which abridges the right of the citizen to catty arms for his security or defense; indeed, there is a whole class of people, who even unaccused of a crime, are legally compelled to appear in court: jurors.

Now the state itself has a statute, which is as follows:

NMSA 30-7-2.4. Unlawful carrying of a firearm on university premises; notice; penalty. A. Unlawful carrying of a firearm on university premises consists of carrying a firearm on university premises except by: (1) a peace officer; (2) university security personnel; (3) a student, instructor or other university-authorized personnel who are engaged in army, navy, marine corps or air force reserve officer training corps programs or a state-authorized hunter safety training program; (4) a person conducting or participating in a university-approved program, class or other activity involving the carrying of a firearm; or (5) a person older than nineteen years of age on university premises in a private automobile or other private means of conveyance, for lawful protection of the person's or another's person or property. B. A university shall conspicuously post notices on university premises that state that it is unlawful to carry a firearm on university premises. C. As used in this section: (1) "university" means a baccalaureate degree-granting post-secondary educational institution, a community college, a branch community college, a technical-vocational institute and an area vocational school; and (2) "university premises" means: (a) the buildings and grounds of a university, including playing fields and parking areas of a university, in or on which university or university-related activities are conducted; or (b) any other public buildings or grounds, including playing fields and parking areas that are not university property, in or on which university-related and sanctioned activities are performed. D. Whoever commits unlawful carrying of a firearm on university premises is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.

The above clearly abridges the right of the students of universities (many of whom are citizens) to bear arms and, in the case of student-housing, even keeping arms. (To assert that there are other places they could keep their arms, like their car or family's house, is to justify the abridging and to assert that the keeping of arms is subject [arbitrary] governmental regulation.)

The point of these city/state issues is not as proof that we do not have a second amendment, but illustration of an underlying mode of thought which nullifies it: entities that are under their Constitutions are less and less bound by their Constitutions -- this is prevalent not only w/ the federal government, but at every level and every political subdivision. ~ Indeed, might makes right is more the rule, and more embraced, than a love of justice by "'Law' Enforcement Officers."

This brings us to the federal [and national] level: and very first, we must realize, that the US Constitution is not a national constitution, but a federal constitution. It is written for the operation of the federal government, and there are only a few things which are prohibited the states: entering treaties, Ex Post Facto Law, etc. The US Constitution has, however, been twisted around -- especially by 'incorporation' to mean things which it does not and cannot mean -- a prime example would be the 1st Amendment: the prohibitions therein are explicitly placed upon Congress, yet the courts have magically altered that (via incorporation) to mean legislature, and then applied that twisted interpretation to the states.

The same is true of the commerce clause: the 'states' portion by which the courts have granted unlimited power to the federal government is in a list, between foreign nations and Indian nations. (Indian nations might even be thought of as native nations, as opposed to foreign, but that is a tangent.) To apply the regulatory powers claimed by the federal government (WRT the States) in a foreign nation would be to wage war thereon -- thus we can see that the powers assumed and asserted by the federal government over the several States fits the definition of Treason given in the US Constitution; yet, even though such is true, it is so inconvenient and contrary to modern thought that it would be dismissed out-of-hand.

“. . . do we really have a 2nd Amendment?”

Probably not, but I am going to not only pretend that we do, but act as if we do have a 2nd Amendment.

I’d rather have my S&W Bodyguard in my pocket and not need it than not have it and need it!

I don’t understand this love affair with Molon Lave. Spartans held Thermopylae for three days, they were ultimately annihilated.

Retire your Gadsden screen name immediately, because it bears too much resemblence to the moniker of the flag of patriotism.