What Arms Are "Common"? Fighting Gun Bans...

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • indykid

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 27, 2008
    11,859
    113
    Westfield
    Common use still can't answer "shall not be infringed" which the writers knew meant arms that they couldn't dream about. What is common use now wasn't common in the late 1700s. And yet it is part of what some like to call the "living" constitution, which takes into account what we have now but wasn't common 200 years ago.

    It still comes down to shall not be infringed, which unfortunately Heller said he would agree to "reasonable restrictions" which in doing so limited the results of the court finding. Per the court writings, more than one judge was open to "shall not be infringed" and did not like what Heller stated but because Heller agreed to infringements, we lose.
     

    Ingomike

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    28,176
    113
    North Central
    Common use still can't answer "shall not be infringed" which the writers knew meant arms that they couldn't dream about. What is common use now wasn't common in the late 1700s. And yet it is part of what some like to call the "living" constitution, which takes into account what we have now but wasn't common 200 years ago.

    It still comes down to shall not be infringed, which unfortunately Heller said he would agree to "reasonable restrictions" which in doing so limited the results of the court finding. Per the court writings, more than one judge was open to "shall not be infringed" and did not like what Heller stated but because Heller agreed to infringements, we lose.

    Still means shall not be infringed.
    View attachment 84087

    I agree, now just put 5 people on SCOTUS that will rule that way and we will live in utopia. In the mean time the article explains our best fight currently available. It does no good to wish for .45 ammo to win a fight if all you have is a .22 pistol...
     

    actaeon277

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Nov 20, 2011
    92,864
    113
    Merrillville
    Since Crazy Joe Biden made a case that "you can't fight a tank with an AR" or something like that, I think the case is made that we should be able to own fighters and tanks.
     

    DRob

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    20   0   0
    Aug 2, 2008
    5,869
    83
    Southside of Indy
    Bear in mind the 2nd Amendment was in reference to exactly the same arms the military had at the time. Those crazy dangerous muzzle loading assault rifles!
     

    mergatroid

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 30, 2018
    202
    18
    INDIANAPOLIS
    I think you might be able to argue that any weapon that was covered by the assault weapons ban was "common". If it was common enough to be unbanned several years later, it is still common today? Anyone follow that?
     
    Top Bottom