The Wall Street Journal‘s editors opined on the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, a gun rights vs gun control case currently before the Supreme Court. That case centers on whether New York State gets to allow or not allow a citizen of New York (and so a citizen of the United States) to carry a firearm outside his home based on a bureaucrat’s personal view of the “need” for the citizen to carry.
In the course of that piece, the Editors exposed their own misunderstanding.
Regular citizens in New York face an almost insuperable bar if they want to bear a firearm for personal defense.
There’s nothing in the 2nd Amendment that authorizes Government to specify any purpose, personal defense or other, for an American to keep and bear Arms:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
On top of that, the 9th and 10th Amendments bar Government from making one up.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
(The courts already have made clear the relationship between this individual right and a Militia.)