Quote:
Originally Posted by jyl
Excerpts from majority opinion that I thought were interesting. My (quick and dirty) thoughts in the headings -
2nd Amend doesn't imply individual right to possess "military" weapons; no indication that NFA is unconstitutional
It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful
in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be
banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely
detached from the prefatory clause.
2nd Amend doesn't imply right to possess firearms not typically owned by lawful citizens, whatever that means
We therefore read Miller to say
only that the Second Amendment does not protect those
weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens
for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns.
|
M-16's have
never been legal to possess. That is a fully automatic weapon.
I legally own/carry this...so much for banning "short-barreled" shotguns:
The U.S. just got a little safer today. Thank you, Supremes!
