Sorry, I should have said “protect” in both clauses. I know better than to suggest we get rights from government… I screwed up the wording in one of those clauses. I agree it is important to stress that these are rights that we have regardless of the Constitution.
Check out this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiXup3fWX7w&list=PLALopHfWkFlFXsDIlSx8KisqZM5OotGWq#t=14m27s where Judge Napolitano says the following at Mises Inst event:
“…Your right to keep and own a gun, which my friends is not the right to shoot at a deer, it’s the right to shoot at the government if it is taken over by tyrants.”
It seems like the Judge’s position is in conflict with some of the points made by Levinson in this article: http://constitution.org/mil/embar2nd.htm
Given the difficulty of understanding the 2nd Amendment, is there anything wrong with saying the following to 2nd Amendment skeptics: “If private ownership of firearms is not protected by the 2nd Amendment, then it is most certainly protected by the 9th and/or 10th.”