Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Grampaw Willie, SASS No.26996

Thought for the Day

Recommended Posts

in poking around on the 'Net this morning as I usually do I found a good article on American Thinker

 

George Washington Would Have Owned an AR-15

 

the interesting thought -- which I thought would make a good "Thought for the Day" is as follows:

 

Quote

when the Founders wrote the Second Amendment it was because the British were coming, not because it was the start of deer season.

 

Further Reading:   ( Reason )

 

Second Amendment Does Not Apply to 'Assault Weapons,' Says U.S. District Judge

 

the operative language may come to this:

Quote

Scalia wrote elsewhere in Heller, while attempting to reconcile his opinion with the 1939 Miller precedent, that "We therefore read Miller to say only that the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns. That accords with the historical understanding of the scope of the right."

 

at some point the Courts will likely review and determine what is and is not covered under The Second.    Right now the line would appear to be defined by commonality of use and ownership.

 

Share this post


Link to post

There is some important reading out on the AR15 rifle in the last few days

 

For example, there's this:

US federal judge rules that AR-15s and large capacity magazines are not protected by Second Amendment [The Independent]

 

reference to source article:

US federal judge rules that AR-15s and large capacity magazines are not protected by Second Amendment

 

the keys, as I understand them are:

1. Heller affirms that the Right to arms is an individual right; and then

as the Heller case venue was DC there was an argument that the Second applied only to the federal enclave: DC, and then

2. McDonald -- venue Chicago -- affirms that the Second is "incorporated" to the states via the 14th;

 

that said, we turn to the question of what falls under the purview of the Second.   the previous post covers this, Scalia having written, that to be consistent with the earlier decision in Miller -- everything that is in common use -- is protected under the Second.

 

now it would seem judge Young has challenged these concepts.  From the article:

Quote

“AR-15s and [large capacity magazines] are most useful in military service, they are beyond the scope of the Second Amendment ... and may be banned,” Massachusetts District Court Judge William Young wrote in his ruling.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.