Connecticut (et al)

[Seth]

What you hoplophobes fail to understand is that the PRIMARY (though not exclusive) purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to protect military arms and the people's right to keep and bear them in order to provide an effective (well regulated) militia.

The wording of the second amendment gives military use as the only purpose of the amendment.

Wrong. That particular question was settled by the Supreme Court in McDonald v Chicago. It protects against both state and federal infringement of the individual right to keep and bear arms for self defense that is NOT dependent upon membership in the militia. You may disagree with the Court, but, well....who gives a shit what you think? Not me.

Since the nation no longer needs civilian militias, the entire purpose of the second amendment is now obsolete.

You think the nation no longer needs the militia, but the Congress feels differently about it, which is why the Militia Act has not been repealed, and why every able-bodied male between 18 and 45 is automatically a member of the Unorganized Militia and subject to being called to duty in the Organized Militia by Congress. Your opinion on our laws is beyond irrelevant.

[The_Metatron]

What you hoplophobes fail to understand is that the PRIMARY (though not exclusive) purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to protect military arms and the people's right to keep and bear them in order to provide an effective (well regulated) militia.

The wording of the second amendment gives military use as the only purpose of the amendment.

Since the nation no longer needs civilian militias, the entire purpose of the second amendment is now obsolete.

That's decidedly inconvenient.

[Seth]

The 2nd isn't going to be repealed in my or my kids lifetimes. They'll get their assault weapons and magazine ban, but they'll grandfather existing weapons, just like the last time. Only thing it will do is make the existing weapons and magazines that much more valuable (just like the last time) and smart people will make a shitload of money.

Time to bulk order AR mags.

Yup. Currently, Feinstein, knowing that she cannot confiscate them, is angling for them to be listed as Class III NFA firearms like machine guns that would have to be registered and put on the NFA registry, along with a tax stamp and background checks just like machine guns.

It is within the realm of possibility that this could happen. It's at least within the confines of the Constitution. I doubt it will happen though because of the enormous cost of trying to register all those semi-automatic firearms. The Canadians tried it and gave it up after about a billion dollars wasted.

[Seth]

The 2nd Amendment was not intended to mean that anybody who wants to buy an AR-15 should legally be allowed to do so any more than it means that anybody who wants to buy a howitzer should legally be allowed to do so.

Um, for someone who's supposed to be a spook, you know absolutely nothing about the law. It IS legal to own a howitzer. I've got a friend who owns half a dozen of them, and a tank (with operating gun), and a bunch of 105mm recoilless rifles, and grenades, and artillery rounds, and machine guns and all sorts of good stuff like that. It's all perfectly legal under the NFA to own. You just have to pass a background check and pay a $200 tax on each NFA item.

Let me repeat, it is perfectly legal to own machine guns, artillery pieces, hand grenades, 40mm grenade launchers, Claymore mines, rockets and rocket launchers and any other kind of military arms that you are willing and able to acquire within the law. You can even build your own explosive devices and suchlike, if you have an SOT (Special Occupational Taxpayer) license, which costs you $1000 per year and must be issued to anyone who legally qualified to get one who can pay.

It's all about where Uncle Sam draws the line, and many people would like to see plenty of currently-legal firearms on the other side of that line.

No, it's not. It's about the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment and what neither Congress nor the tyrant majority can do, no matter how much they might want to do it.

The only way to eliminate the RKBA is to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Good luck with that.

[Seth]

I'd suggest an amnesty period of 6 months where US citz can turn in their assault weapons and high cap magazines and receive a gift voucher good for $100 at Bed, Bath, and Beyond. Following the amnesty period, mandatory minimum sentences should be put in place for anyone in possession of an assault weapon or high capacity magazine. Warrants should be issued for police to search the premises of persons suspected of possessing, trafficking, or manufacturing this contraband with the same restrictions placed on the granting of a warrant for other purposes (no anti-gun Gestapo). Minimum sentences should scale to the nature of the infraction: More assault weapons/HC mags -> longer minimum sentence. Or perhaps a minimum fine/jail sentence combination. Say 3 years for possessing one high cap magazine or a $30,000 fine.

Lotta dead feds and cops and there will still be millions of guns and tens of millions of magazines in circulation.

[Seth]

Repeal the 2nd amendment and all its corollaries in every state constitution.

You lose.

Neener.

Good luck with that. Let me know when you've got it done.

[Blind groper]

Lotta dead feds and cops and there will still be millions of guns and tens of millions of magazines in circulation.

The mere fact that there are people who think like that is sickening. This is the pathology known as American gun culture.

[JimC]

Pretty much. A civilian militia is a bad joke.

We need to make a distinction between a civilian militia, and a properly organised Army Reserve, where there is regular yearly training, and it is controlled by the regular army.

[Jason]

Pretty much. A civilian militia is a bad joke.

We need to make a distinction between a civilian militia, and a properly organised Army Reserve, where there is regular yearly training, and it is controlled by the regular army.

With weapons stored in a secure armoury and dispensed only at training and when the reserve is called upon? Sounds reasonable. I believe that was the intent of the 2nd amendment in the first place.

[JimC]

Pretty much. A civilian militia is a bad joke.

We need to make a distinction between a civilian militia, and a properly organised Army Reserve, where there is regular yearly training, and it is controlled by the regular army.

With weapons stored in a secure armoury and dispensed only at training and when the reserve is called upon? Sounds reasonable. I believe that was the intent of the 2nd amendment in the first place.

Yes, Oz has an Army Reserve...
http://www.defencejobs.gov.au/army/rese ... pQodoj0A2A

[Jason]

So does Canada. They come up around my neck of the woods and train a few times a year.

[Ian]

The 2nd Amendment was not intended to mean that anybody who wants to buy an AR-15 should legally be allowed to do so any more than it means that anybody who wants to buy a howitzer should legally be allowed to do so.

Um, for someone who's supposed to be a spook, you know absolutely nothing about the law. It IS legal to own a howitzer. I've got a friend who owns half a dozen of them, and a tank (with operating gun), and a bunch of 105mm recoilless rifles, and grenades, and artillery rounds, and machine guns and all sorts of good stuff like that. It's all perfectly legal under the NFA to own. You just have to pass a background check and pay a $200 tax on each NFA item.

Let me repeat, it is perfectly legal to own machine guns, artillery pieces, hand grenades, 40mm grenade launchers, Claymore mines, rockets and rocket launchers and any other kind of military arms that you are willing and able to acquire within the law. You can even build your own explosive devices and suchlike, if you have an SOT (Special Occupational Taxpayer) license, which costs you $1000 per year and must be issued to anyone who legally qualified to get one who can pay.

The point always manages to go right over your head, doesn't it? Seth, I wasn't talking about the handful of jerkoffs (including your friend) who jump through paperwork hoops and pay special fees to own things like this. I'm talking about what is available over the counter to anyone without so much as a look at a driver's license let alone with a federal background check or having their weapons noted in a registry.

Try to pay attention when I use the term anybody. Law-abiding collectors aren't the problem. Anybody is the problem. I'm talking about the need to make it more difficult for anybody to buy himself an assault rifle on a whim. Nothing would happen to your friend, except that he wouldn't be able to walk out of a gun show with an over-the-counter, unregistered assault rifle. The vast majority of Americans (including gun owners and even NRA members) agree with the idea of 100% background checks. The problem is that gun manufacturers would see a drop in business and private dealers at those shows would take a hit, so the gun lobby has kept that loophole wide open for years.

Since you're so interested in the law and interpretating the 2nd Amendment, I'm sure you're aware of how much more restrictive the laws were regarding firearms in the early years of the Republic. In many cases they were considerably more restrictive than today.

[Seth]

Lotta dead feds and cops and there will still be millions of guns and tens of millions of magazines in circulation.

The mere fact that there are people who think like that is sickening. This is the pathology known as American gun culture.

Lotta people out there who believe in the motto "Give me liberty or give me death" and are willing to die to ensure that tyranny does not become the order of the day in the United States. Can't say as I blame them at all.

[Jason]

And how do you come to equate "liberty" with "semi-automatics with high capacity magazines, howitzers, tanks, M2 machine guns, and whatever else you and your friends have"?

[Ian]

It's just rhetoric used as a baby blanket. It meant something back in the late 18th Century. He and his crowd thinks it still makes perfect sense.