there4eyeM
unlicensed metaphysician
- Jul 5, 2012
- 20,515
- 5,206
- 280
That's quite a leap. I'm not certain "infringement" necessarily means what you apparently think it does.That the 'right' to bear arms may be what is guaranteed, yet there is nothing in such a provision to exclude regulation of what arms are available.
Except the word "infringed", and the fact that "regulating" what arms can be owned is an infringement.
But, you know, aside from the English vocabulary and common logic, there's nothing there to stop you from controlling people's lives. Sure.
As long "arms" are available, one may have the 'right' to bear them. They still cost money, so not everyone might be able to have them. Infringement? Are taxes on firearms infringement? Is not importing some firearms infringement? What is the non-infringement part of the AR15 duplicate M16 not being available in stores near you?
Of course, perhaps your position is that, yes, all this and more is infringement. Such a radical view is your 'right', and it will eventually get you a whole lot of infringement some day.