2nd Amendment SCOTUS Poll

[jyl]

Dream on, with your tin foil hat. Assault rifle bans have been upheld repeatedly by the Courts of Appeal and the Supreme Court has denied review.

You may mis-read Miller as you wish, but notice that citing that case for the argument you're making has had a success rate of, well, ZERO.

Originally Posted by id10t

jyl - The SCOTUS has already *said* that the individual has the right to own military style weaponry...




For those who say that the militia was the equivalent of the draft, and now that we have a standing army and don't need one, I'd like to know what the heck I had to sign up for at the Post Office right around the time I was getting out of high school... in the late 80s....

[cashflyer]

Originally Posted by jyl

The militia of 200 years ago was a group of armed citizens who would come together as an organized military force to defend their state in times of crisis. Back then, the state was the primary political, military, and economic entity, the federal government was small and weak and many wanted it to stay that way. They still remembered the tyranny of the English king.

From Military History of the United States:
Prior to and during the founding of the United States, military forces were supplied by untrained militia commanded by the states. When the Continental Congress first ordered a Continental Army to be formed, it was to be made up of militia from the states. That army, under the command of General George Washington, won the Revolutionary War, but afterwards was disbanded.

However, it soon became obvious that a standing army and navy were required. The United States Navy began when Congress ordered several frigates in 1794, and a standing army was created, however it was still only minimal and it relied mostly on contributions from state militia in times of war.

On one hand, I want to agree with the popular opinion that the 2nd amendment was designed to give all free Americans the right to own arms. After all, it is the constitution that affirms our right to abolish our government: "...Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it …."

However, it is clear that the drafting and ratification of the amendment predates the formation of a standing army. It would be very easy for somebody to make the argument that the maintenance of a standing army negates the need for individuals to come to the defense of the country.


Personally, I believe that it is the lack of an armed citizenry that allows oppressive regimes to come into power, and I believe that it is the duty of every American to stand against tyranny, even in our own government.

I would never support a law to require all citizens to own a firearm, just as I would never support a law that would restrict a citizens right to own one if they so choose.

To remain a free people, we must have the tools to retain our freedom and liberty - whether those tools be a free press or an armed citizenry, they are our tools to wield.

[red-beard]

Originally Posted by jyl

The DC law says a long gun in the home must be unloaded/disassembled OR with a trigger lock. http://www.nraila.org/statelawpdfs/DCCL.pdf So you can have your shotgun loaded at home, trigger lock on, and key - according to this, I guess the key can be tethered to the gun.

Okay, maybe the requirement that long guns be disabled would be overturned. So you can now have long guns, but not handguns. Would that be what pro-gunners would like? Not nearly, I think.

As for CA's laws, the typical legal test of "reasonable" is not if you or I think it makes sense or is a good idea, the test is usually a lot more deferential to the government entity's findings, priorities, and judgment.

My point is, if the Court decides there is an individual right but it is subject to "reasonable government regulation" or some test like that, then outside of a handful of places with pretty extreme gun laws, there probably won't be that much practical impact.

Yes, but you cannot be a new resident and get a permit. They, like Chicago, stopped allowing the registration of new firearms. I doubt there are any Federally licensed gunshops in DC these days, so how do you aquire one if you are a resident? Just because they aren't "totally banned" doesn't mean that the regulation don't make that the effect. NYS doesn't have to give you a reason for a denial, or the addition of restriction. If the Judge feels like it, you are restricted.

[red-beard]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

Devil's Advocate here:

Assume for a moment that state restrictions on firearms are lifted and the individual right to keep and bear arms is upheld. Where does it end? Does it? Can the private individual go buy howitzers? F16s? Stinger missiles? Nuclear weapons? Hell, I'm sure the defense contractors would be tripping over themselves to sell these kinds of things to people, but where exactly would the restrictions end?

In the 1700's the WMDs of the day was the Cannon and the Rocket. They are also quite unaffordable for most people. With the intention of the 2nd Amendment to allow the citizens to rise up against an oppressive government, a government which has F-16's and stinger missles and Nuclear weapons, how do you oppose such a government, except by having those same items?

Yep, nuclear weapons and F-16's are expensive, just like cannons were expensive. It doesn't mean that some one can't afford them.

[Rick Lee]

There are no gun shops at all in DC. Closest ones are in Prince Georges Co., MD and Alexandria, VA and they will not even think of selling to a DC resident. However, I did buy a Combat Commander at the one in Alex. when I lived in DC, but had a VA license and address. I moved to Arlington before the five day waiting period was up. This was about 12 yrs. ago. None of those laws in DC has the slightest effect on crime in DC. Not one iota. Oh, and there are plenty of neighborhoods where the DC police will not even respond to a call before sunrise. It's too dangerous. So you're basically on your own and are not allowed to defend yourself. Great place, eh?