Supreme Court Cases

""The right there specified is that of 'bearing arms for a lawful purpose.' This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed; but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government...""

Quote by US Supreme Court on cruikshank (1876)

""We have already recognized in Heller at least one way in which the Second Amendment's historically fixed meaning applies to new circumstances: Its reference to 'arms' does not apply 'only [to] those arms in existence in the 18th century.' 'Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.'""

Quote by Supreme Court on modern arms interpretation

""Finally, the adjective 'well-regulated' implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training. See Johnson 1619 ('Regulate': 'To adjust by rule or method'); Rawle 121–122; cf. Va. Declaration of Rights §13 (1776), in 7 Thorpe 3812, 3814 (referring to 'a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people,'""

Quote by Supreme Court on heller decision