The individual or collective right question is generally irrelevant to the question at hand. At issue is whether the words "shall not be infringed" means (as mojave suggests) "shall not be infringed by the federal government but may be abrogated as the state government sees fit" or whether it means "shall not be infringed" (as the period immediately following the word "infringed" indicates).
Well. My question was meant to be separate from the “shall not be infringed.”
Good ‘ole Mojave doesn’t even believe that the 2nd amendment is a right. Therefore, the collective vs. individual right question is irrelevant to him. He danced around questions regarding California’s restrictive gun laws from someone else as well. He is using these issues to cover for his basic disregard for the 2nd amendment if his liberal state of choice has laws that restrict the right to bear arms.
“shall not be infringed” means (as mojave suggests) “shall not be infringed by the federal government but may be abrogated as the state government sees fit” or whether it means “shall not be infringed” (as the period immediately following the word “infringed” indicates).”
I’m a day late and a dollar short. You beat me to it. How is it so hard for some people to understand?