Gun control supporters insist that "the right of the people" really means the "right  of the
        state" to maintain the "militia" mentioned in the amendment, and that this  "militia" is the
        National Guard.

         Such a claim is not only inconsistent with the statements of America's early  statesmen,
        and the concept of individual rights as understood by generations of  Americans, it
        misdefines the term "militia."

         For centuries before the drafting of the Second Amendment, European political  writers
        used the term "well regulated militia" to refer to the citizenry on the  whole, armed with
        privately-owned weapons, led by officers chosen by  themselves.

         America's statesmen defined the militia the same way. Richard Henry Lee,  before
        ratification of the Constitution the author of the most influential writings  advocating a
        Bill of Rights, wrote, "A militia when properly formed are in fact  the people themselves
        . . . and include all men capable of bearing arms. . . . To  preserve liberty it is essential
        that the whole body of people always possess  arms. . . ." Making the same point, Coxe
        wrote that the militia "are in fact the
         effective part of the people at large." And George Mason asked, "[W]ho are the  militia?
        They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."

         The Militia Act of 1792, adopted the year after the Second Amendment was  ratified,
        declared that the Militia of the United States (members of the militia  obligated to serve if
        called upon by the government) included all able-bodied males of age. As the U.S.
        Supreme Court observed in U.S. v. Miller (1939), "The signification attributed to the
        term Militia appears from the debates in the  [Constitutional] Convention, the history and
        legislation of Colonies and States,  and the writings of approved commentators. These
        show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in
        concert for the common defense . . . bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind
        in  common use at the time." The National Guard was not established until 1903. In  1920
        it was designated one part of the "Militia of the United States," the other  part remaining
        all other able-bodied males of age, plus some other males and  females.

         However, in 1990, in Perpich v. Department of Defense, the Supreme Court held that the
        federal government possesses absolute, unlimited power over the Guard.  (The Court
        never mentioned the Second Amendment, noting instead that federal power over the
        Guard is not restricted by the Constitution's Article I, Section 8, Clauses 15 and 16.)

         Thus, the Guard is in fact the third component of the United States Army, behind the
        Army and Army Reserve. The Framers' independent "well regulated militia" remains as
        they intended, America's armed citizenry.

         This historical and legal precedent was upheld in U.S. v. Emerson, a case that may
        become a definitive test of the Second Amendment before the U.S. Supreme Court, when
        District judge Sam R. Cummings struck down provisions of the Clinton-Gore
        Administration's 1994 Crime Bill. In his decision he stated, "A textual analysis of the
        Second Amendment supports an individual right to bear arms."

         Judge Cummings based his ruling on a "historical examination of the right to bear arms,
        from English antecedents to the drafting of the Second Amendment." With his clear and
        determined decision, he shut the door on the argument that the "militia" is merely the
        national guard, and upheld two centuries of belief that all American citizens are in fact
        the "militia" and have the right to bear arms. Judge Cummings also admonished those who
        attempt to diminish the Second Amendment while defending select sections of the
        constitution, writing, "The  rights of the Second Amendment should be as zealously
        guarded as the other  individual liberties enshrined in the Bill of Rights."