Post #212,852
6/28/05 12:39:05 PM
|
Nope. Wrong again.
"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."
Note, that it is not "the right of the State". Not by any wild stretch of the imagination. To rationalise that requires redefinition of "people", "right", "militia", "keep", "bear" and "infringed".
Regardless of what you think. This amendment is clear and simple. If you don't like it, build a national referendum to change the Constitution. I'd wish you luck, but I find the goal of only permitting arms to government employees abhorrent.
[link|http://www.runningworks.com|
] Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #212,854
6/28/05 12:59:52 PM
|
Nice try. It's *YOU* that needs an amendment.
Read the case law. Read the USSC's opinions (both liberal and conservative court opinions and rulings). The plain fact of the matter is that within the legal community, there is no controversy here. The amendment plainly give the states the right to arm their own militias.
Look, I'm not saying that private ownership is illegal - or even that there is no right to private ownership. I'm just saying, (as all courts have who have addressed the issue), amendment 2 does not apply to private ownership of firearms. You want an explicit Constitutional right to private ownership? Lobby for one. It currently does not exist.
bcnu,
Mikem
It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell
|
Post #212,858
6/28/05 1:04:21 PM
|
Any non-contorted reading of that sentence . . .
. . makes clear the people are to be armed so they are ready and able to participate in a militia. By this logic the people should be armed with weapons appropriate to a militia, which makes clear that the recently expired ban on assault rifles was, in fact, unconstitutional.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #212,861
6/28/05 1:07:33 PM
|
No.
And the reason the decision was made the way it was is my point (and that of the rest of the legal community's) exactly. That ruling concerned "private ownership unrelated to the arming of a State's militia."
bcnu,
Mikem
It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell
|
Post #212,864
6/28/05 1:13:59 PM
|
Also...
RPGs, battlefield nukes and artillery.
Peter
[link|http://www.ubuntulinux.org|Ubuntu Linux]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
|
Post #212,874
6/28/05 1:24:52 PM
|
Well, a case could be made . .
. . that classes of weapons unknown to the writers could be excluded, since they did not have the opportunity to exclude them. Artillery did exist and I see no reason to ban private ownership of artillery. It's kind of difficult to deploy, hard to conceal and expensive to operate so it's not quite the thing for a drive-by shooting.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #212,919
6/28/05 7:21:39 PM
|
Re: Well, a case could be made . .
A recoilless rifle makes quite a mess and would sit nicely on the back of a truck.
If classes of weapons unknown to the writers are excluded, it's basically down to muskets, pikes and sabres.
Peter
[link|http://www.ubuntulinux.org|Ubuntu Linux]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
|
Post #212,923
6/28/05 7:42:39 PM
|
I think crew served weapons would not be in order
as an individual right to bear arms, you cant load aim and fire without assistants, doesnt make the cut.
thanx,
bill
All tribal myths are true, for a given value of "true" Terry Pratchett
[link|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/]
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #212,878
6/28/05 1:42:51 PM
|
you can own artillery, and use it on special occasions
A few restrictions, the shell cannot be HE/WP etc, as that comes under different jurisdictions as they are labelled explosives but a regular Mortar, cannon etc is fine. Thats why a 16inch gun is fine, an RPG is not.
thanx,
bill
All tribal myths are true, for a given value of "true" Terry Pratchett
[link|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/]
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #212,882
6/28/05 2:07:35 PM
|
My uncle has a "3 pounder".
[link|http://johnsmilitaryhistory.tripod.com/threepdr.html|E.g. Here]. That's not his, but that's what it looks like. It's a replica.
He's fired it at an artillery range.
He once said he could own a machine gun if he had the necessary "tax stamp".
YMMV.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
