I think you're misunderstanding the second amendment and self-defense. The second amendment doesn't enumerate the right to self-defense. Self-defense is an affi

I think you're misunderstanding the second amendment and self-defense. The second amendment doesn't enumerate the right to self-defense. Self-defense is an affirmative defense to a criminal charge (in this instance) which is within the purview of the states and not the federal government due to the tenth amendment. Heller held that the second amendment protected an individuals right to keep and bear arms for traditionally lawful purposes, which was later incorporated into the states in McDonald. One traditionally lawful purpose is self-defense, but the states get to define self-defense; of which there are already many differences between the states. I suppose the right of self-defense could be found in the fourteenth amendment - it certainly has a legal history going back thousands of years. Even so, it would be distinct from the second amendment. Think of it more like emergent behavior stemming from interactions in our dual sovereignty system of government. All that to say that no, I don't believe this would factor into any analysis when it comes to second amendment regulation cases. The second amendment would protect against regulating these less lethal weapons if Caetano is any indication though.