EDIT: RE: no right to poop(sic) in the constitution

It's a list of things the government may not do, not a list of things you may do. Try reading it, it's very short. I would imagine the court would rule a law against that would violate the right to life.

EDIT: It didn't need to be acknowledged because there wasn't a strong push to disarm the population until fairly recently.

EDIT2: It looks to me like they only really go back to just after the civil war, largely to keep African Americans from carrying firearms. The first attempt by the Federal Government to ban them was in the mid 20th century which was exactly what I expected.

EDIT3: James Madison tried and failed to pass the legislation (presumably because it was unpopular), at the state level (not federal level) and it didn't prevent people from owning guns just carrying them in public.

EDIT for your edit: Huh? When I was a kid in Texas way back in the 90's, it was illegal to carry a gun period. You could take them out hunting or to the range or whatnot, but carrying a gun was illegal. The first concealed handgun law was 1995 if memory serves. Carry bans go back to the colonial era.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/06/26/conservati...

And yet, they saw fit to include the Ninth Amendment, so some nincompoop wouldn't go "there's no right to privacy!"

> I would imagine the court would rule a law against that would violate the right to life.

The wording is "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"; what happens if pooping is made a capital crime?

Why is banning abortion, marijuana, and whatnot not a similar violation of the "liberty" part of the same clause?

(and what's with this edit-to-reply thing you've got going?)

The Ninth Amendment basically says "this isn't a list of all the rules".

There's no right to poop in the Constitution. Do we have one? If Congress banned pooping, how would the court rule?