Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Sure..No, we recognize that women and men have the same rights under the law. The 2A was not written to exclude one group or another, it was there to set a limit on Federal power.
I do not describe anything, I do not omit anything, I excerpted the relevant paragraph to the point I was making- the definition of "militia" in the context of the 2A, as applied in Heller.
The link was cited and previously provided- the Cornell Law page. Read it, it is quite clear.
Sure..
“The majority analyzed the Second Amendment’s two clauses and concluded that the prefatory clause announces the Amendment’s purpose.1”
You do know what purpose means along with “ well regulated”, The entire purposes is to provide for a well regulated militia bubba.
It was mentioned..And you were wrong…
“The majority analyzed the Second Amendment’s two clauses and concluded that the…
The first was the purpose ....
A well regulated militia is the purpose of the 2@.
Nothing could be more plain.
If the government does try to confiscate civilian owned firearms, it is possible that a new revolution will start.He understand what he needs to do. Rescind the 2nd. Good luck with that.
tenthamendmentcenter.com
Now, you are intentionally omitting. The militia purpose is not the exclusive purpose, it is only one component.It was mentioned..And you were wrong…
“The majority analyzed the Second Amendment’s two clauses and concluded that the…
The first was the purpose ....
A well regulated militia is the purpose of the 2@.
Nothing could be more plain.
Weapons manufacturers, the NRA, and gun owners need to shut the fuck up on politics, law, and the effects of unemployment rates on crime.The medical community and everyone in it needs to shut the fuck up on guns, politics, and law.
Ha haNow, you are intentionally omitting. The militia purpose is not the exclusive purpose, it is only one component.
Typical...you bogusly select little phrases and words to twist the final outcome. Heller must register his firearm and be a licensed owner. It’s on the books.Now, you are intentionally omitting. The militia purpose is not the exclusive purpose, it is only one component.
Again, the Cornell page describes the ruling:
"Coming back to the Court’s initial declaration that the two clauses must “fit” together, the majority concluded that the two clauses fit “perfectly” in light of the historical context showing that “tyrants had eliminated a militia consisting of all the able-bodied men . . . by taking away the people’s arms.” 22 Thus, the Court announced the reason for the Second Amendment’s codification was “to prevent elimination of the militia,” which “might be necessary to oppose an oppressive military force if the constitutional order broke down.” 23 The Court clarified that the reason for codification does not define the entire scope of the right the Second Amendment guarantees.24 This is so because, the Court explained, the Second Amendment codified a pre-existing right that included using firearms for self-defense and hunting, and thus the pre-existing right also informs the meaning of the Second Amendment.25"
Thats funny. The govt controls all the hospitals. You‘d lose your healthcare and insurance bubba if you were part of a revolt.If the government does try to confiscate civilian owned firearms, it is possible that a new revolution will start.
Gun control efforts ignited the first American Revolution and it is possible that history will repeat itself.
The last thing I hope to see is our nation breaking apart but we do seem to be approaching that point. If we divide it will make it much easer for China to rule the world.
How the British Gun Control Program Precipitated the American Revolution | Tenth Amendment Center
Had the American colonies lost their war for independence, the British government intended to strip them of all their guns and place them under the thumb of a permanent standing army.
Wrong again, Heller asserts, and McDonald affirms, "individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right.”Now you’re changing the bar....hilarious. It’s still the PRIMARY purpose. That it’s additional purpose is only recent for personal self defense, is HIGHLY REGULATED.
California's ban was struck down (twice) in Federal District Court, the 9th Circuit stayed the decision awaiting further review. (it is NOT overturned)What part of this don’t you get ? Name one municipality, country or state that has specifically regulated AR15 rifles for personal use has been over turned. None.
it doesn’t matter what you say. Heller to gain relief still has to register the firearm and be a licensed gun owner.Wrong again, Heller asserts, and McDonald affirms, "individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right.”
California's ban was struck down (twice) in Federal District Court, the 9th Circuit stayed the decision awaiting further review. (it is NOT overturned)
All the recent so-called "assault weapons" bans were working their way through the courts, but have been sent back down to be re-evaluated in light of Bruen.
Nope…they were banned without provisions to license regulations.So it's only a matter of time- they will all go down like dominoes.
Your posts are increasingly inane. Heller was all about D.C's licensing and storage laws, which the SCOTUS said constituted an outright ban, and declared them unconstitutional. Same in McDonald, Bruen, etc. Those cases were all challenges to laws that restricted licensing, storing, registering, and/or carrying arms.Only becuae it was an outright ban. We don’t ban firearms, we regulate them. No state that has regulated and not banned any firearm has been overturned
…..Your posts are increasingly inane. Heller was all about D.C's licensing and storage laws, which the SCOTUS said constituted an outright ban, and declared them unconstitutional. Same in McDonald, Bruen, etc. Those cases were all challenges to laws that restricted licensing, storing, registering, and/or carrying arms.
There are no "AR15 specific regulations"- that question is a strawman. Legislatures write laws that try to ban entire classes of guns, not just particular models. All of the laws passed that apply to AR15's apply to a long list of guns besides the AR.
Your arguments are the same ones we have been hearing from gun grabbers for decades. Those arguments have all been addressed and dismissed in Heller, McDonald, Bruen, etc.
FYI- technically speaking, the difference between a law and a regulation is who enacted it. If a legislature enacts it and a Governor signs it, it's a law. If a Gov't agency enacts it by decree, it's a regulation.
In practice, there is no meaningful distinction, and regulations have the force of law. Both types- laws and regulations- have been challenged (and defeated) in the courts.……
Technically speaking…Heller got relief ONLY by, registering his handgun he carried or stored and being licensed himself. No one in DC can carry Handgun with out being licensed and registering the handgun and no,one can be allowed to keep a handgun in his home without registering the handgun and being licensed to avoid the necessity of storing it.Your posts are increasingly inane. Heller was all about D.C's licensing and storage laws, which the SCOTUS said constituted an outright ban, and declared them unconstitutional. Same in McDonald, Bruen, etc. Those cases were all challenges to laws that restricted licensing, storing, registering, and/or carrying arms.
There are no "AR15 specific regulations"- that question is a strawman. Legislatures write laws that try to ban entire classes of guns, not just particular models. All of the laws passed that apply to AR15's apply to a long list of guns besides the AR.
Your arguments are the same ones we have been hearing from gun grabbers for decades. Those arguments have all been addressed and dismissed in Heller, McDonald, Bruen, etc.
FYI- technically speaking, the difference between a law and a regulation is who enacted it. If a legislature enacts it and a Governor signs it, it's a law. If a Gov't agency enacts it by decree, it's a regulation.
In practice, there is no meaningful distinction, and regulations have the force of law. Both types- laws and regulations- have been challenged (and defeated) in the courts.
I own a few, and all of them have shot less people than Alec Baldwin's "prop" gun.I don't know any gun owners that own a single gun...
Lol. Now you speak as if D.C. won that fight, like Heller was just refusing to get a license or something. That's not how it was.Technically speaking…Heller got relief ONLY by, registering his handgun he carried or stored and being licensed himself.
Ha ha
Now you’re changing the bar....hilarious. It’s still the PRIMARY purpose. That it’s additional purpose is only recent for personal self defense, is HIGHLY REGULATED.
What part of this don’t you get ? Name one municipality, country or state that has specifically regulated AR15 rifles for personal use has been over turned. None.
The Heller decision is the law if the land....guess what, Heller still has to REGISTER his hand gun and be licensed to even possess it. Everything is as I’ve always said. The main purpose of the 2@ is for well regulated militia and everything else can be subject to regulation. It’s potentially on the books and ready to pass...with no SC interference.
Sounds like a good start for everyone and every firearm nationally. Registration and licensing of all firearms is the way.....
That is a state decision. There certainly isn’t anything in Heller that prevents it. DC requires both registration and licensing for a handgun, not just for carry, but for home defense. It’s the law of the land NOW.First of all, very few states have any licensing or registration
All you need to do is read the mission statement of the national guard. It fulfills the requirement of a well regulated militia.Second is that the "well regulated militia" is everyone according to the state constitutions.
Anything beyond a well regulated militia, is nothing more than the privy of states that allow bubbas to get together in week ends and play soldier. None of these entities are protected under the law, liability wise, to participate in any protection role from either outside or within.Third is that the meaning of "well regulated" is to be well practiced and proficient.
It does not mean "restricted" and that is what you are trying to interpret as meaning.
Strong Firearm laws put the legal owner more in jeopardy in keeping their firearms from being used in crimes. It works with “ machine guns” it works in every developed country in the world that has more strict gun control then us.Forth is that anyone intent on committing a crime that is more serious than the gun violation penalty is not at all going to be deterred by any gun law you pass.
He's a troll, so....Your posts are increasingly inane.
Dufus.He's a troll, so....
