Can you be a Progressive Democrat and still the support the Second Amendment?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

105. Point by point

1) The Constitution did/does not not deal with a provision for the military. Clearly the Continental Army existed and prior to the ratification of the BoR in 1791, Congress created the Army in 1789:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/congress-establishes-the-us-army-sept-29-1789-228648

2) No it would not follow. It might follow if the government was actually supplying the arms and ammo and if there had been a provision to surrender them upon concluding one's service.

4) A link is not a limit. Simply put, security requires a militia; a militia requires an infantry that can shoot. Shooting is a practiced skill that requires regular attention and use. While on my college rifle team the change in my abilities from practicing 3-4 days per week to the once a week during mid-terms was evident. Saying that arms can only be used for militia duties is like saying a venue used for voting can only be used for voting.

5) Please site the age limits from the Constitution.

It may be a fine point but I would agree that individual conduct, in regard to a right, is not absolute nor unlimited. As was stated in Heller, reasonable laws may still prevail. From the Heller majority:

"...nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."