'Assault weapon' bans: Constitutional?

[Vidi]

Well, I've seen people very quick with revolvers, but even with speed loaders they wouldn't be as fast as a good semiautomatic.

Other restrictions or requirements might also be permissible. Licensing and registration of firearms. Safety classes, liability insurance requirements, etc. Joe Blow could still have his BFG-9000 but could wind up paying some hefty fees, licenses, and taxes.

True, but to expound upon your point. A well trained or well practiced individual can be much more deadly with a semi auto mandgun than a fully automatic assault rifle in the hands of a rank amatuer.

A smart shooter with a good bolt-gun can cause considerably more damage than the loon in CO by simply shooting at distances greater than most peple can fathom.

exactly

 

[Borillar]

True, but to expound upon your point. A well trained or well practiced individual can be much more deadly with a semi auto mandgun than a fully automatic assault rifle in the hands of a rank amatuer.

A smart shooter with a good bolt-gun can cause considerably more damage than the loon in CO by simply shooting at distances greater than most peple can fathom.

exactly

So, if a bolt action repeater is deadlier, what is the need for an AR15?

 

[M14 Shooter]

A smart shooter with a good bolt-gun can cause considerably more damage than the loon in CO by simply shooting at distances greater than most peple can fathom.

exactly

So, if a bolt action repeater is deadlier, what is the need for an AR15?

-The AR-15 mimics the USGI service rifle. in common use and ordinary equipment.
-There's a reason the army switched from bolt guns to semi-autos to assault rifles.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Other restrictions or requirements might also be permissible. Licensing and registration of firearms. Safety classes, liability insurance requirements, etc. Joe Blow could still have his BFG-9000 but could wind up paying some hefty fees, licenses, and taxes.

Well, some of those restrictions could be Constitutionally problematic, it’s what the state can prove in support of its law enacting a restriction, not what sounds or seems reasonable.

Licensing and registration would likely manifest an undue burden, there is no evidence either would reduce crime. And registration could be construed as a 4th Amendment privacy rights violation.

Can the state clearly document that those who took a safely class have had fewer accidents than those who did not? And what would be the rationale of the state to establish liability insurance requirements? How would liability be determined, or is the state merely exhibiting animus toward gun ownership?

Examples of reasonable restrictions would be: prohibiting gun ownership of those adjudicated mentally ill, undocumented immigrants, and convicted felons. The state could provide documented evidence in support of such restrictions, as they contribute to a legitimate governmental interest.

 

[ItsjustmeIthink]

Are you saying that if the assault weapons ban is unconstitional then nothing can be done about Assault weapons?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Other restrictions or requirements might also be permissible. Licensing and registration of firearms. Safety classes, liability insurance requirements, etc. Joe Blow could still have his BFG-9000 but could wind up paying some hefty fees, licenses, and taxes.

Well, some of those restrictions could be Constitutionally problematic, it’s what the state can prove in support of its law enacting a restriction, not what sounds or seems reasonable.

Licensing and registration would likely manifest an undue burden, there is no evidence either would reduce crime. And registration could be construed as a 4th Amendment privacy rights violation.

Can the state clearly document that those who took a safely class have had fewer accidents than those who did not? And what would be the rationale of the state to establish liability insurance requirements? How would liability be determined, or is the state merely exhibiting animus toward gun ownership?

Examples of reasonable restrictions would be: prohibiting gun ownership of those adjudicated mentally ill, undocumented immigrants, and convicted felons. The state could provide documented evidence in support of such restrictions, as they contribute to a legitimate governmental interest.

Accidental death by firearms is usually less then 1000 people a year. Out of a Population of over 300 million and a weapon population of a similar number the incidence of accidental shootings is to low to justify requiring safety classes one must pay for.

I though would not mind a return to gun safety taught in school and else where.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Are you saying that if the assault weapons ban is unconstitional then nothing can be done about Assault weapons?

The very definition of an assault weapon makes it unbannable vis a via the current Supreme Court ruling and previous ones.

 

[Vidi]

A smart shooter with a good bolt-gun can cause considerably more damage than the loon in CO by simply shooting at distances greater than most peple can fathom.

exactly

So, if a bolt action repeater is deadlier, what is the need for an AR15?

The person at the trigger is the deciding factor as to the deadliness of the weapon.

In the end, the right to bear arms is not about need, as it is about the right itself. People can name off a variety of reasons why we "need" access to those weapons ( theyre all pretty much moot ) but the right exists, so therefore is exercised.

I dont hunt with a AR-15. I dont NEED an AR-15. But if one is available, I want to own it, because I know others will.

Now if youre one that favors a restriction on gun ownership, then what criteria will you choose to base that restriction on?

 

[ItsjustmeIthink]

Are you saying that if the assault weapons ban is unconstitional then nothing can be done about Assault weapons?

The very definition of an assault weapon makes it unbannable vis a via the current Supreme Court ruling and previous ones.

Then for what reason was Article V included in the constition?

 

[Borillar]

Other restrictions or requirements might also be permissible. Licensing and registration of firearms. Safety classes, liability insurance requirements, etc. Joe Blow could still have his BFG-9000 but could wind up paying some hefty fees, licenses, and taxes.

Well, some of those restrictions could be Constitutionally problematic, it’s what the state can prove in support of its law enacting a restriction, not what sounds or seems reasonable.

Licensing and registration would likely manifest an undue burden, there is no evidence either would reduce crime. And registration could be construed as a 4th Amendment privacy rights violation.

Can the state clearly document that those who took a safely class have had fewer accidents than those who did not? And what would be the rationale of the state to establish liability insurance requirements? How would liability be determined, or is the state merely exhibiting animus toward gun ownership?

Examples of reasonable restrictions would be: prohibiting gun ownership of those adjudicated mentally ill, undocumented immigrants, and convicted felons. The state could provide documented evidence in support of such restrictions, as they contribute to a legitimate governmental interest.

What I am trying to point out is that the government could effectively ban certain classes of firearms without actually banning anything. Just making people jump through lots of hoops can be an effective deterrent.

 

[The Infidel]

Can a pencil be considered an asault weapon if I decided to stab someone in the neck with it?

I mean after all.... a pencil cant kill without me at the other end of it

Is that a "clean" enough question?


BTW, that question got me kicked off the jury in a capital murder trial

 

[Darkwind]

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.

Given that, please describe how banning such weapons does not violate the protections of the 2nd.

I am going to have to see the source for these claims. I know of no SCOTUS ruling in which the 2nd Amendment applies ONLY to the appropriate service in the Militia.

Please read what I said more carefully.

There is no militia requirement for the 2nd Amendment.

None whatever.

 

[ItsjustmeIthink]

Can a pencil be considered an asault weapon if I decided to stab someone in the neck with it?

I mean after all.... a pencil cant kill without me at the other end of it

Is that a "clean" enough question?


BTW, that question got me kicked off the jury in a capital murder trial

No, but do pencils come in high-capacity, semi-automatic form?

 

[Darkwind]

Can a pencil be considered an asault weapon if I decided to stab someone in the neck with it?

I mean after all.... a pencil cant kill without me at the other end of it

Is that a "clean" enough question?


BTW, that question got me kicked off the jury in a capital murder trial

No, but do pencils come in high-capacity, semi-automatic form?

yep...they come in packs of 12 and cases of 144.

 

[ItsjustmeIthink]

Can a pencil be considered an asault weapon if I decided to stab someone in the neck with it?

I mean after all.... a pencil cant kill without me at the other end of it

Is that a "clean" enough question?


BTW, that question got me kicked off the jury in a capital murder trial

No, but do pencils come in high-capacity, semi-automatic form?

yep...they come in packs of 12 and cases of 144.

My god...our schools....its a deathtrap!:eek
____________________________________
Second Amendment: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

" being necessary to the security of a free State" Is the coast guard not enough for "the security of a free State"?
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Second+Amendment

 

[Vidi]

Can a pencil be considered an asault weapon if I decided to stab someone in the neck with it?

I mean after all.... a pencil cant kill without me at the other end of it

Is that a "clean" enough question?


BTW, that question got me kicked off the jury in a capital murder trial

too funny...and no a pencil is not an assault weapon...unless its used to write a Mitt Romney speech DOH!

sorry I couldnt resist that one.

My wifes cousin posted some pic of a rock with the obligatory text that the rock was an assault weapon as well.

merriam-webster defines Assault Weapon as:

any of various automatic or semiautomatic firearms

so I think we can safely eliminate anything thats not considered at least a semi automatic firearm from the discussion.

funny though.

 

[Politico]

Why are fully automatics banned, then?

They aren't.

 

[Darkwind]

No, but do pencils come in high-capacity, semi-automatic form?

yep...they come in packs of 12 and cases of 144.

My god...our schools....its a deathtrap!

Safe, as long as they ban straws!

 

[Borillar]

Can a pencil be considered an asault weapon if I decided to stab someone in the neck with it?

I mean after all.... a pencil cant kill without me at the other end of it

Is that a "clean" enough question?


BTW, that question got me kicked off the jury in a capital murder trial

Made me think of this...
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEbpXnJGEq4]Casino - Joe Pesci alias Nicky Santoro in pen scene - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Ernie S.]

A smart shooter with a good bolt-gun can cause considerably more damage than the loon in CO by simply shooting at distances greater than most peple can fathom.

exactly

So, if a bolt action repeater is deadlier, what is the need for an AR15?

Not the point, though, is it? the second amendment says "shall not be infringed."
It does not say, "shall not be infringed except for scary looking guns"