MuadDib

I disagree, it's not that the founders didn't care so much, as Pan said, they did not anticipate it. Nor did they have to or should they have had to. I agree that there is certainly room for restriction, especially considering the development of modern weaponry. However, I also agree that the Second Amendment ensures an individual right to bear arms and that that right is there to protect those individuals from their government should tyranny emerge. Problem is, in the modern world, the kind of arms necessary towards that end are unacceptable in the hands of individuals. What SCOTUS really needs to address here, and I hope they do, is what level of restriction on arms is acceptable under the Constitution.

Here's a great report by the Attorney General about his department's conclusions on the issue. I agree almost entirely with their findings:

__________________
"The courts that first rode the warhorse of virtual representation into battle on the res judicata front invested their steed with near-magical properties." ~27 F.3d 751