What restrictions are inherent to the right to arms?

Disagree.
The right to arms inherently does not include a right to commit a crime with a gun.
That sort of thing. :)
My reply was focused on type of arms not on actions with arms.
I would say that as a matter of principle that the "right to keep and bear arms" does not include offensive actions like threatening harm or shooting or killing someone without justification. Under those circumstances, laws restricting such illegitimate actions can not be defined as a "restriction on the right" because the right is not implicated.
Correct. This is clearly consistent with the limitations inherent to, say , the right to free speech or the right to assemble. - you do not have the right to assemble a mob in someone's back yard, slander his wife and then incite said mob to burn down the house.
 
Where have these 2nd Amendment right gun nuts been the last six years? The right to keep and bear arms is to ensure the power to remove tyrants, and we've had one in the white house and where are the armed patriots? Bragging about their weapons while Obama destroys the country. Makes me want to join the NRA so I can cancel my membership.
Look... an anti-gun nut completely avoiding the topic set forth in the OP because he doesn't understand the question well enough to make a lame attempt at an actual answer.
:lol:
In the meant time, you probably never had need for a gun in your life.
I don't see an actual response to the OP
I took a couple gun whackos to collect from machines in bad neighborhhoods when I was in the laundromat business among other enterprises
Still don't see an actual response to the OP
These guys were pooping their pants like most gun nut phonies do when the rubber meets the road and we were actually in the barrio.
Still don't see an actual response to the OP
Maybe you're one of these clowns, maybe not, I think you are.
Still don't see an actual response to the OP
I get on all threads where I can sharpshoot you whackos.
Still don't see an actual response to the OP
Don't like it, too bad. M-14? OOOOhhh what a bad dude.
Still don't see an actual response to the OP

Thank you for proving that you're just anti-gun loon completely avoiding the topic set forth in the OP because he doesn't understand the question well enough to make a lame attempt at an actual answer.
 
"What restrictions are inherent to the right to arms?"

The rights enshrined in the Second Amendment are no different than any other of our rights, inalienable but not absolute, and subject to reasonable restrictions by government:

'Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.' DC v. Heller (2008)

And as is the case with other rights, the burden rests with government to demonstrate a rational basis for a given restriction, to support that restriction with objective, documented evidence, and that the desired restriction pursues a proper legislative end. Absent these fundamental requirements, a measure seeking to restrict the Second Amendment right cannot pass Constitutional muster.
 

Forum List

Back
Top