How in the HELL can the "Militia" in the Bill of rights, ratified Dec. 15, 1791, apply to a Gov't formed Militia when the Militia Act wasn't passed until May 2, 1792?!?!!!
law professors, with a straight face, argue the entire issue can be broken down into mere grammar. The mere grammar denies this ONE amendment as an exception to all the OTHER INDIVIDUAL rights in all the amendments.
Never mind that such gramar games may not apply across the years. Remember s and f were interchangable, so I would argue ENGLISH should be applied. Of course these types of law professors are the first ones lined up and shot in any revolution so they have a legitimate fear of individual rights.
They had historical precedent going back the colonies.
States, and the colonies before them, as well as cities and towns, had militias long before 1791. The Militia Act of 1792 was passed under Congress power "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States", which is found in Art. I, Sec. 8 of the main body of the Consitution not under the Second Amendment.