Reply #50: More corrections...

[SteveM]

I have already corrected you about the notion of "assault rifles" elsewhere.

The right to keep and bear arms is NOT contingent on a well regulated militia; hence, the rest of your "argument" about what is "not 'well-regulated'", avoiding "background checks," "waiting periods etc." does not follow, nor hold up under scrutiny.

You should re-examine the notion of what constitutes "well-regulated," BTW. That notion is far less sophisticated compared to training standards in any of the standing armed forces in the U.S. In the event, it applies only to the powers granted the federal government, and also to the states, in the Articles.

I should also point out that background checks (which I support), "waiting periods etc." as well as other gun "interventionist strategies" have not been shown to be effective in correcting or improving on any of the societal ills gun-controllers claim as important. SEE: CDC studies referencing gun-control laws.