siglite
Member
I agree. And it's clear from other states' amendments, that not all of the FF viewed it this way. But in the end, the language we have is the compromise. The final version of the 2nd clearly supports individual rights. And it looks to me like Scalia, Roberts, Alito, and hopefully Kennedy agree that the compromise leans heavily towards the individual right. I'm actually convinced after reading the transcripts and hearing the audio, that we will have a pro individual right opinion.
The discussion and arguments drifted towards that "defense against the tyranny of the majority" angle, but were quickly diverted. I don't think it was in Gura's, nor the court's interest to consider that angle of the 2nd. Not for this case.
What was interesting for me, was the reference and discussion of the roots of our bill of rights. Back in English common law. And Blackstone. I learned a bunch of stuff about the second by reading those transcripts. Though, they raised as many questions as they answered. For example, which of the FF (besides Madison) espoused the "collective" or "common defense" angle. There was an allusion to Jefferson supporting that position, which I found surprising and inconsistent, and now must research.
