I think that for most of our history there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment, until the decision by the late Justice [Antonin] Scalia. And there was no argument until then that localities, and states, and the federal government had a right–as we do with every amendment–to impose reasonable regulations.
Governments have "rights"? I thought Government in America had "duties" to the citizens which it serves on every level; municipal, county, state and national.
It may be a matter of semantics.
But when the "rights" of Government conflict with the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS of the citizens, then the citizens serve the government.
From NATURAL NEWS:
(NaturalNews) At the heart of a free and prosperous society is the principle of private property ownership. Without private property, the centralization and corrupting influence of power grows, as the freedom of the individual dissipates. Democratic socialism is a great example of the dissolution of private property, under which, the demands of the majority override those of the individual. The majority claims they have a "right" to the goods and services (property) of individuals and businesses. They then use the government as a vehicle of force to conscript property and take it.This concept of the "rights" of a government is the tyranny of the majority. It has no place in a Republic.