If the militia included all the people, doesn't the preamble that you rely on not really restrict the right much at all?

It includes all the people."

Walter E. Dwellinger: "Yes, I do believe it includes all the people in the sense of Verdugo-Urquidez, all those who are part of the polity."

Can you comment on that?"

Walter E. Dwellinger: "Yes"

Anthony M. Kennedy: "And this makes, it does... I think you're quite right in the brief to say that the preface shouldn't be extraneous.

This means it's not extraneous.

The Constitution reaffirms the rights, reaffirm several principles: The right of the people to peaceably assemble, the right to be secure in their homes, the Tenth Amendment reaffirms the rights, and this is simply a reaffirmation of the militia clause."

Walter E. Dwellinger: "Justice Kennedy, I think any interpretation that delinks the two clauses as if they were dealing with related but nonetheless different subject matters has that to count against it, and what you don't see in the debates over the Second Amendment are references to, in those debates, the use of weapons for personal purposes.

What you see is the clause that, that literally transposes to this:

"Because a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be-- "

We hold that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to have unused arms for self defense in the home and that the District's handgun ban as well as its requirement that firearms in the home be rendered inoperative, violates that right.

Our opinion is very lengthy examining in detail, the text and history of the Second Amendment."