Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lol. Did I say anything about "semi automatic firearms"?
The line is drawn arbitrarily, that's the point. "Common use" is just somebody's interpretation.
Oh, I'm also glad you acknowledge the role political agenda plays in the Court.
There is nothing constitutional about firearm control. Nothing.
Imagine if you will for one minute, if you care so greatly about the whole narrative of fighting wars for corporate profit, wouldn't it stand to reason if a standing militia equally equipped were to hold congress in check before jumping on board the war band wagon...
Say a war like oh... Vietnam for example...
Don't claim you are pro gun control when the elected officials you vote for, are persuaded to profit from going to war...
If there ever was an argument to topple gun control, and to destroy your progressive narrative on it. That's one.
Think about that one for a moment.
Or would you rather have swamp rats who are bought behind closed doors wage war in the name of corporate interests...
That is my understanding as well.. There are however some views that it would not include canon and such which were described as ordnance. So certainly all the smaller weapons that one could take home.
The USSC however basically found that it was an individual rather than a corporate right but that it is in fact subject to regulation. That is not far from the founders view though the regulation is open ended very much subject to the political winds in the court. I would think the gunnies are mostly safe with the existing court. But down the line? We will see.
That makes two of us. The poster's definition of arms lines up with what the founding fathers, and therefore the document that they wrote, considered arms. Yet for some reason, an attempt was made to cast doubt on that definition, by the very same poster. And I thought my 12-year-old was good at circular arguments...
Lol. Did I say anything about "semi automatic firearms"?
The line is drawn arbitrarily, that's the point. "Common use" is just somebody's interpretation.
Oh, I'm also glad you acknowledge the role political agenda plays in the Court.
Lol. You didn't have to.
"Common use" is not just somebody's interpretation. It means exactly what it says. Just as knives, forks and spoons are in "common use" when people eat.
Did I say anything about a "political agenda" in the courts? I only explained the courts interpretation of the 2nd Amendment and mentioned a subsequent appellate courts reversal of D.C.'s concealed handgun laws.
The courts job is to interpret the Constitution as it was originally written. All justices are sworn to uphold it "so help them God". I guess whether they have a political agenda or not will all depend on who's ox is being gored. At this point in time it appears to be yours.
On the Supreme Court there are 5 Republicans and 4 Democrats. The D.C. Court of appeals has a Democrat majority. Both courts have ruled in favor of the 2nd Amendment. The Supreme Court in Heller/McDonald and the D.C. Circuit in overturning D.C.'s arbitrary handgun licensing laws.
Anyway it doesn't really matter what you or I think. The Supreme Court has made it's decision and unless you can succeed in striking the 2nd Amendment from the Constitution that decision will stand into the foreseeable future. We can argue back and forth all day and that still will not change.
Last edited by Ex New Yorker; 10-11-2017 at 06:35 PM..
There is in my mind no doubt that the Founding Fathers wanted a citizenry armed to the degree that they could overthrow any regime they found oppressive.
That view however is not acceptable in today's environment. So even NRA and other quite conservative groups will not support it. And the mildly conservative USSC ran away and ducked. I call it "The Grand Conspiracy". The agreement by most sides of the situation that the 2nd does not mean what it meant.
The rub is that it meant virtually any neighborhood group could put together a company or battalion and drive out the government operatives. The Founding Revolutionaries would have liked that. But the powers that be today could not stand it.
If interpreted as designed we would have an instant rebellion as the low socioeconomic areas armed up and asserted their rights. And the Compton Battalion drives off LAPD.
In the end it would likely have been the end of the 2nd.
There is in my mind no doubt that the Founding Fathers wanted a citizenry armed to the degree that they could overthrow any regime they found oppressive.
That view however is not acceptable in today's environment.
There is nothing constitutional about firearm control. Nothing.
Imagine if you will for one minute, if you care so greatly about the whole narrative of fighting wars for corporate profit, wouldn't it stand to reason if a standing militia equally equipped were to hold congress in check before jumping on board the war band wagon...
Say a war like oh... Vietnam for example...
Don't claim you are pro gun control when the elected officials you vote for, are persuaded to profit from going to war...
If there ever was an argument to topple gun control, and to destroy your progressive narrative on it. That's one.
Think about that one for a moment.
Or would you rather have swamp rats who are bought behind closed doors wage war in the name of corporate interests...
There is in my mind no doubt that the Founding Fathers wanted a citizenry armed to the degree that they could overthrow any regime they found oppressive.
That view however is not acceptable in today's environment. So even NRA and other quite conservative groups will not support it. And the mildly conservative USSC ran away and ducked. I call it "The Grand Conspiracy". The agreement by most sides of the situation that the 2nd does not mean what it meant.
The rub is that it meant virtually any neighborhood group could put together a company or battalion and drive out the government operatives. The Founding Revolutionaries would have liked that. But the powers that be today could not stand it.
If interpreted as designed we would have an instant rebellion as the low socioeconomic areas armed up and asserted their rights. And the Compton Battalion drives off LAPD.
In the end it would likely have been the end of the 2nd.
Oh, so you're the only purveyor of truth here? Got it.
There is in my mind no doubt that the Founding Fathers wanted a citizenry armed to the degree that they could overthrow any regime they found oppressive.
That view however is not acceptable in today's environment. So even NRA and other quite conservative groups will not support it. And the mildly conservative USSC ran away and ducked. I call it "The Grand Conspiracy". The agreement by most sides of the situation that the 2nd does not mean what it meant.
The rub is that it meant virtually any neighborhood group could put together a company or battalion and drive out the government operatives. The Founding Revolutionaries would have liked that. But the powers that be today could not stand it.
If interpreted as designed we would have an instant rebellion as the low socioeconomic areas armed up and asserted their rights. And the Compton Battalion drives off LAPD.
In the end it would likely have been the end of the 2nd.
There is no "rub" it still means that. I am not sure what you are alluding to with "driving out goverment operatives". Perhaps you have a different perspective on what "preserving rights and liberties" means, than most?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
