Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Virginia Tyrant Ups The Ante

Well, let's see what some Supreme Court justices DID have to say:
Before addressing the verbs “keep” and “bear,” we interpret their object: “Arms.” The 18th-century meaning is no different from the meaning today. The 1773 edition of Samuel Johnson’s dictionary defined “arms” as “weapons of offence, or armour of defence.” page 7

United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes. page 2

As the quotations earlier in this opinion demonstrate, the inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right. The handgun ban amounts to a prohibition of an entire class of “arms” that is overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose. page 56

All quotes from DC v Heller [emphasis added]

So let's see.
Is an AR 15 a "weapon of offence". Yes.
Is an AR15 "in common use for lawful purposes" Yes, it's the most popular type of rifle in the country.
Is an AR15 a member of a class of arms chosen by American society for lawful purposes? Yes.

So, yes, you do have a constitutional right to own an AR15. Period.



Because an AR15 is unquestionably in common use for lawful purposes. Full automatic is a more complicated question.



Yes it was. There's a strict procedure to do it. The Democrats don't have the necessary support to do it while following the procedure, so they are trying every possible way to subvert the Second Amendment without going through the procedure. Gutting the Second Amendment would be a horrible thing, but changing the Constitution without going through the proper procedure is even worse.

Perhaps you have already had one too many

Evan williams..

The 2nd amendment is ambiguous which I imagine was on purpose. All that our elected officials can do regardless of their political affiliation , is interpret it and base laws on that interpretation. Its then up to the supreme court to determine whether those laws are constitutional. Thats an oversimplification but I don't claim any expertise in constitutional law. I am not in favor of an assault weapons ban for the simple reason that it won't accomplish anything and it will simply cause them to go after something else but the reality is that the supreme court will not deem it unconstitutional. The last one wasn't found to be unconstitutional but it had no teeth. It was purely cosmetic. You could go to the gun show, buy a sporterized ak, go to the next table and buy an ak stock set, and then go to the next table and buy all of the 30 rd mags and 75 rd drum mags you wanted.[/quote]

What’s ambiguous about this?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

You lost this argument almost 30 years ago when they didn't throw out the first assault weapons ban. There are existing local assault weapons bans and every time someone tries t get them declared unconstitutional, it gets thrown out. It just happened in Illinois back in August.

It's become obvious you're nothing more than an agitator at this point. Not a big surprise since you live in an urban area like Nashville. With a murder rate of about one every 3 days, you really trust the govt to provide for your personal safety?

What’s ambiguous about this?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." [/quote]


Sounds pretty ambiguous to me. Does this mean I can own a nuclear weapon or at least a small dirty bomb? Doesn't say the government can't force you to purchase a very expensive license and maybe put an outrageously expensive tax on them so no one can afford them. It does not say the government can't force you to register them.

You're absolutely correct. We've failed to defend our liberties during the last century and by doing so we've emboldened the enemy. Now, It's time to correct our mistakes and stand up to tyranny.

I guess we will be seeing footage of you being shot by police on CNN.

You lefty's and leftist sympathizers all seem to think the battles will be between government and citizens. You are a Tory. If you are not for the Constitution then you are against it. I don't want cops shot myself. If you haven't noticed we are in a tense time of our history. We are the best armed population in the world, the Civil war would have been way different if they had even had bolt action Mauser's. We have some of the best trained ex military people on the planet, many of us understand basic electronics! And there are far more citizens armed by far than ever! Rest assured you may prefer to join rather than resist. I have always heard they shoot fence sitters first.

Sounds pretty ambiguous to me. Does this mean I can own a nuclear weapon or at least a small dirty bomb? Doesn't say the government can't force you to purchase a very expensive license and maybe put an outrageously expensive tax on them so no one can afford them. It does not say the government can't force you to register them.[/quote]
For the recod .............this idiot is a damnyankee.
Carry on.

What’s ambiguous about this?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." [/quote]


Sounds pretty ambiguous to me. Does this mean I can own a nuclear weapon or at least a small dirty bomb? Doesn't say the government can't force you to purchase a very expensive license and maybe put an outrageously expensive tax on them so no one can afford them. It does not say the government can't force you to register them.[/quote]

He is a troll.

Nah. It's better to select your favorite whiskey and favorite eggnog you prefer, and make your own blend.

I know in my county, most of the deputies would be on the right side of the fight. Very few guardsman would be willing to deploy against citizens. The only LEO's I would expect to follow the Governor's orders would be state troopers, but with a salary of $45,000 a year, I doubt they'll retain the intestinal fortitude to keep going if [bleep] hits the fan.

He is a troll.
[/quote]

SHE is a prissy little [bleep].

I am an agitator because I don't agree with you and I don't run away because you throw infantile insults at me. I won't play along with your fantasies about fighting the government because they are trying take away your 2nd amendment rights. I am way too old to put up with pre-pubescent fabricated drama. The reality is that they can ban your ar15 and there is nothing you can do about it other than vote those people out and if you don't have the votes then you suck it up and accept it. We live in a republic, as I was earlier corrected, and all we can do is vote for our representatives. You want to die for your right to own an ar15, go ahead. I will be drinking a beer in my recliner watching it unfold on CNN.

SHE is a prissy little [bleep].[/quote]

I am a troll because I am right and it pisses you off

It pisses me off that you're a little chunt.

I understand. Its an argument you can't win and you are frustrated and stomping your wee little feet. My daughter used to be that way when she was 12.

You haven’t won anything it’s the internet guy!

You have proven that you have no spine, you’ll sit and watch your fellow Americans battle it out for your freedoms or lack thereof and you’ll waltz in to the victory party whoever the victor.

You and only you have to live with your decisions, just like the rest of us. I’ll sleep well, I’m sure you will too given your MO at every point in your life.

I've never seen anyone be so proud to be such a little bitch.