[robertpaulsen]

"We can further prove the intent of the Founding Fathers by observing how they lived and by reading many of the supporting articles and letters that outline their philosophy on the symbiotic relationship between an armed populace and a government that serves its people."

If you understand anything about the Founding Fathers it was that they trusted their state to protect their rights. Back then, as is now, your state defines and protects your individual RKBA -- not the federal government and not the second amendment.

[tpaine]

paulsen erroneously claims:

"--If you understand anything about the Founding Fathers it was that they trusted their state to protect their rights. --"

Not so. In Article VI the founders specifically wrote that "-- any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding. --" This Constitution, "-- shall be the supreme Law of the Land; --"

Back then, as is now, your state defines and protects your individual RKBA -- not the federal government and not the second amendment.

Agit-prop, -- straight from the 'majority rule' [democratic] playbook. -- Because you also contend that State & local majorities can prohibit most any-thing, including guns.

Your state ~should~ define and protect your individual RKBA, but in most cases it does not.