squeeze berry
Gold Member
- Nov 9, 2010
- 9,296
- 984
The 2nd protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, regardless of that individual's association with any militia, and so your post is meaningless."A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State"
Now, back to what I said:
Various SCotUS rulings have established that for a weapon to be protected under the 2nd amendment, it must be appropriate for service in the militia, in common use at the time, part of the ordinary military equipment. and suitable for any of the traditional legal uses for a firearm.
There is, quite possibly, no better specific example of this weapon than the AR-15 with 20/30rd USGI magazines, and no better general example than 'assault weapons' as a class.
I look forward to your reasoned argument to the contrary.
How about the two words "well regulated"?
Like I said before, I am no gun control advocate....but you asked.
the Squeeze Berry Militia is well regulated