By the way, the indispensible criteria for a legally coherent definition with which to classify the various models is, "In which party resides Second Amendment right?"
The mere reference to the militia in a particular interpretation does not begin to answer this question. One observer's militia-bound "right" might consist of an individually-held right to possess militia type arms regardless of official designation as militia. Another's might consist only of a state "right" (or power) to arm citizens as militia. In terms of the legal debate, these two theories are night and day different. They are diametrically opposed. If Bob has been lumping them together he has misunderstood and mischaracterized the entire debate. JNH
