Gun Control & RKBA

But I disagree with your interpretation of the language of the amendment. The militia clause does indeed imply two categories within "the people," and those would be militia members and non-militia . However, that phrase isn't incorporated into the complete sentence in a way that excludes the non-militia group from protection. That is, the RKBA is ascribed to the entire set ("the People&quot and not to the militia subset. The militia clause instead describes a rationale to protect this right of the people as a whole, in order that a well-regulated militia can be called up. Eliminating that rationale would not effect that right of the people, it would only remove one possible justification for protecting it.

The structure of the sentence is such that the RKBA is antecedent to both the prohibition of infringement and to the militia. This is the case with any sentence structured in that manner: "in order to have thus-and-so, you have to make sure such-and-such exists." The "such-and-such" is recognized as preexisting. Claiming that because the militia is no longer necessary, the RKBA isn't, either, is a "denial of the antecedent" fallacy. It's not valid to infer the inverse...