What firearms are protected by the 2nd Amendment

[RadiomanATL]

I have to calculate the trajectory on a 300 yard .30-06 shot. It doesn't fly in a straight line at those distances.

You know what I mean though.

Not really, any firearm out there has a trajectory.

Funny, you knew exactly what I mean in post 16.

 

[zzzz]

Seems to me the right to bear arms are already being infringed on as bearing arms means to carry around with you. The way the laws are now it is a privaledge not a right to bear arms such as pistols and try to carry a shotgun down a street in New York!

Here we get into the living constitution thing. Some think that it ought to be the same as 1700's, in that case the only arms they had was muzzle loaders and single shots. Therefore that is it, no automatics or revolvers and such.

My viewpoint is that a person should be able to posess and carry handguns, rifles and shotguns. Automatic weapons, grenades, missiles and other war items are not neccassary and the 2nd does not state the reason for an individual's right as it does for the militia.

Are the items you mentioned considered arms? If so..... then they are covered.

Nuclear weapons are also technically arms. Are you saying that citizens have a right to nuclear weapons, tanks, SAW's?

 

[Ringel05]

Seems to me the right to bear arms are already being infringed on as bearing arms means to carry around with you. The way the laws are now it is a privaledge not a right to bear arms such as pistols and try to carry a shotgun down a street in New York!

Here we get into the living constitution thing. Some think that it ought to be the same as 1700's, in that case the only arms they had was muzzle loaders and single shots. Therefore that is it, no automatics or revolvers and such.

My viewpoint is that a person should be able to posess and carry handguns, rifles and shotguns. Automatic weapons, grenades, missiles and other war items are not neccassary and the 2nd does not state the reason for an individual's right as it does for the militia.

Are the items you mentioned considered arms? If so..... then they are covered.

Nuclear weapons are also technically arms. Are you saying that citizens have a right to nuclear weapons, tanks, SAW's?

Yes on the nukes and tanks as long as they're "decommissioned", SAWs if it's fully transferable and you pay the tax stamp.
I take it back on the tanks, they can be fully functional also.

 

[zzzz]

Are the items you mentioned considered arms? If so..... then they are covered.

Nuclear weapons are also technically arms. Are you saying that citizens have a right to nuclear weapons, tanks, SAW's?

Yes on the nukes and tanks as long as they're "decommissioned", SAWs if it's fully transferable and you pay the tax stamp.
I take it back on the tanks, they can be fully functional also.

Talk about road rage ...

 

[Uncensored2008]

Hi, uncensored, still wandering around from the last injection?

They let you wander about the grounds after your injection? I would think they'd strap you down or something.

Well, as long as they keep you behind cortina wire (electrified, preferably)

 

[Uncensored2008]

You know what I mean though.

The way I put it is; anything an adult man can carry by himself.

 

[RadiomanATL]

You know what I mean though.

The way I put it is; anything an adult man can carry by himself.

Yeah, but that still leaves the bazookas and other recoiless rifles.

Anything with ammunition over 1 inch in diameter? After all, anything that fires something that big you probably won't be able to carry. And we're also getting into artillery then as well.

 

[The T]

You know what I mean though.

Not really, any firearm out there has a trajectory.

Funny, you knew exactly what I mean in post 16.

How about we claim common sense when it comes to the protection of Life, Liberty, Property when it comes to protecting our families, friends, and communities from invaders both foreign and domestic?

And by the same token understand that criminals don't care a wit of LAW and are gonna do what they do regardless?

 

[RadiomanATL]

Not really, any firearm out there has a trajectory.

Funny, you knew exactly what I mean in post 16.

How about we claim common sense when it comes to the protection of Life, Liberty, Property when it comes to protecting our families, friends, and communities from invaders both foreign and domestic?

And by the same token understand that criminals don't care a wit of LAW and are gonna do what they do regardless?

But your common sense is not the same as Rinata's.

Can't word a law on "common sense". There has to be strict definitions.

 

[Sheldon]

 

[Ringel05]

You know what I mean though.

The way I put it is; anything an adult man can carry by himself.

Yeah, but that still leaves the bazookas and other recoiless rifles.

Anything with ammunition over 1 inch in diameter? After all, anything that fires something that big you probably won't be able to carry. And we're also getting into artillery then as well.

You can own a bazooka, a LAWs, an RPG, a hand held stinger tube but if by some strange chance you can find and purchase ammo for it........... Just don't get caught, you'll have all the sex you don't want for the rest of your life.

 

[zzzz]

One of these legal?

 

[Mini 14]

One of these legal?

Absolutely!

And a shitload of fun too!!!!

Pretty pricey on the ammo though

 

[uscitizen]

Flintlocks, because they were all we had at the time the constitution was written.
All else is just overactive intrepretation.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Founders would only want us to have the weapons of their age. Anything else would be liberal activist agenda-driven interpretation.

 

[Mini 14]

NFA firearms:

National Firearms Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US citizens who are approved in the 4473 process, and hold the required license, are not restricted from owning any of the firearms and destructive devices listed in the NFA.

Basically, if you can pass a background check, and are willing to comply with the FBI and ATF regulations for holding a Class III license, you already have the right to possess these weapons.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Notice that is a privilege by law, not by constitutional intent. By the latter, you have only the right to own a black powder flintlock.

 

[Mini 14]

Notice that is a privilege by law, not by constitutional intent. By the latter, you have only the right to own a black powder flintlock.

By your interpretation.

By mine, the Laws are reflective of the intent of the Constitution.

And so, we disagree.

But the Law agrees with me.

So **** off, comrade.

 

[uscitizen]

And by law handguns are pretty much forbidden in NY, etc...

Law or constitution as the situation dictates?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Notice that is a privilege by law, not by constitutional intent. By the latter, you have only the right to own a black powder flintlock.

By your interpretation.

By mine, the Laws are reflective of the intent of the Constitution.

And so, we disagree.

But the Law agrees with me.

So **** off, comrade.

You are a lib in con's clothing, kiddo. You want to interpret the Constitution by your desire, not its clear intent. You are an activist progressive, obviously, comrade.