Has any court in the land ever determined what “shall not be infringed” means?
“Has any court in the land ever determined what “shall not be infringed” means?”
In relation to that, we need a clear understanding of what “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” means. The propose amendment says “ for all legitimate purposes”.
Are there any circumstances which are not legitimate, circumstances under which people do not have the right to keep and bear arms, circumstances under which a person may be prohibited/prevented from keeping and bearing arms, circumstances under which there is no infringement because the right to keep and bear arms is not held under those circumstances?