THE most significant flaw in the militia-only interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is...

If they are useful to a militia, or are in common use for lawful purposes, then the 2A protects them.

 

Bloody B.S.

It is not the same thing, no prohibited person can "Bypass" any law.

A prohibited person is always prohibited, once Prohibited, always prohibited,
This will never change, nobody is trying to change it.

So why Lie about it ?
So you have a reason to ban guns ????
Yeah, sure....

 

More B.S.

"The Right of "The People" to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed"
Militia be XXXX !

 

We are all 'The Militia' according to US Code.

 

Better keep up with SCOTUS.

 

No, just those in the National guard and all males 17-45.

 

Right, like any politician is ever going to try to restrict women and the elderly from owning firearms because of US Code.

Thats called instant political suicide.

No, for all practical intents and purposes, its everyone.

 

The Militia is used to prohibit firearms to anyone not in "The active Militia"....

"A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State.
(Not withstanding) the Right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

The people have a Right to be Armed.

 

The 2A doesnt say anything about organized vs unorganized (or 'active'). It simply says Militia, which is clearly defined in US Code as all able bodied male adults. We can logically extend that to women, the disabled and the elderly, as any politician that would try to exclude those groups would be quickly tarred and feathered.

Regulated can either mean 'well trained and supplied' as it did in 1700s lexicon, or 'control via government' as is the common usage today. If we go by the latter, we're good because we have a near endless cacauphony of laws and regulations by which The Militia aka The People must abide. If we are not 'well enough' regulated, we have the opportunity to remedy that every time we vote on a new law.

If we go by the former... well, I dont expect theres going to be much support in a program aimed at training and supplying The Militia, so theres probably not going to be much support for that original interpretation of the 2A... sadly. National Militia Training day just sounds ...fun! Although JFK was doing a REALLY good job of this with his Civil Defense initiative. I would like to see that reinstituted.

 

The Gun Ban Bozos are saying only
"The Militia" has the Right to keep and bear Arms.

The Militia has no Rights !

The Militia is activated in a time of need, and operates under Government color of Authority and Government powers.

Only regular Citizens have Rights,
Hence why a Citizens Right to keep and bear Arms is sacrosanct and unimpeachable.
It cannot be infringed.

 

They're cherry picking. They're trying to say that only the Organized Militia can be armed. Theres no legal basis for that. They're making it up.

 

Yes.

Please
Do not supply them the rope with which to hang us.

 

What rope?

 

The Miltia only need be Armed rope they keep pissing up.

 

It was, I believe, a prohiibited person who killed all childen at Sandy Hook.

The guns were owned by another family member, he had easy access to them

 

Cite the portion of the Heller ruling that supposedly said anything in support of your interpretation of the matter. The continual stubborn refusal to do even that minute portion of work in this matter, suggests knowledge on the part of yourself that it does not actually say what is being claimed.

 

Theft of firearms through murder of their rightful owner does not amount to easy access in a manner that could be otherwise affected by implementation of new legislation. The firearms in this matter were kept in a locked safe.

 

It could be everyone. By law, it is not.

 

What law are they bypassing?

 

The law saying that violently insane people should not have firearms.

 

Yes, but this guy was one of those able to unlock the safe, wasn't he? My point here being that laws against certain people being armed are fairly toothless if the individual still has ready access to them

 

No, it suggests laziness on my part in not wanting to look up and read through the entire ruling just to have you declare that your interpretation of it differs from mine in x and z, especially when it seems you've already done so.

 

And how do we combat against violently insane people that haven't been diagnosed or adjudicated as such?

 

Minority Report

 

My idea is that firearm ownership be licensed and that license made dependent on your having an annual mental examination, among other requirements, but I somehow doubt that proposal would have widespread support among politicians, though I think the American people would largely approve.

Failing that I'd try to make it more difficult for violently insane people to have access to firearms owned by others. Background checks should include some info as to whether the buyer has violenty insane people living with them