sqlbullet is correct. British common law caused and was reacted to by the Founders in writing both the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution.

http://www.libertylawsite.org/liberty-forum/why-you-cant-understand-the-constitution-without-the-common-law/

and King George's decrees governing the American colonists were often in violation of British common law and even the magna carta

I have acknowledged the fact that they didn't start from scratch.  To use your idiom: They didn't reinvent the wheel, they made it better, by putting rubber on it.
I'm simply making an argument for a different point of view.  It's all of this legalese BS, that has gotten us into this fix in the first place.
It is my stance, that the US Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and given the fact that our founding fathers had just fought a war, and an insurrection, I'm taking the stance that they were trying to set themselves as far apart as they could from the British Empire.  To me, using some long dead British author's (mind you he was not even a statesman) definitions, and 260ish year old British common law in what is an attempt to mirror the very reason for that war I mentioned earlier is a great misjustice .  It doesn't matter to me that Georgie may have violated them, I am sure he believed he had every authority to act as he did, because he believed that the colonies were subjects of the crown.  I believe that our founding fathers were being explicit when they formed the Constitution.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Damn   "Based on," not mirror of.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Trump/Pence is the only real option for me.  But, it is no more a choice than a shotgun wedding.  Both parties have fielded candidates that well and truly nauseate me.  The only redeeming plank in Trumps platform that gets him my vote is 2A.

And I have no confidence he will do good for my gun rights, just less bad than Clinton.

And his speeches always make me feel ill.  This one was no different.

Agreed.