Weird How The NRA Knew What an AR-15 Was For in 1962, But Now They Claim It is For Personal Protection

Jan 2008
71,993
30,003
Florida
#3
The 2nd protects your right to keep and bear the same weapons carried by a soldier in the military as per SCOTUS, this is true so that if the government were to call up the militia, state of federal, you would already be proficient in the use of arms... (well regulated) ...


Not sure what your issue is here?
Link to where it says that in a SCOTUS opinion or the COTUS?
(Soldiers carry grenades, machine guns, mortars and lots of weapons to dangerous for the civilian market)
 
Jul 2011
63,798
12,959
Old NYC/DMS
#6
No it doesn't.(spare us your GOP interpretations)
This is where you usually disapear and run away.


"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense. "


United States v. Miller - Wikipedia
 
Jan 2008
71,993
30,003
Florida
#7
This is where you usually disapear and run away.


"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense. "


United States v. Miller - Wikipedia
lol
 
Likes: Mister B

Similar Discussions