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

You lost me as soon as you said firearms should be licensed. Constitutional rights should not be subject to licensing.

 

Wouldn't work, as the movie pointed out it's too easily abused. Besides, ESP, especially precognition which is doubly impossible because of paradoxes, is just plain silly, which is why conservatives love it so; not even Philip K. Dick could make it believable, though A. E. van Vogt did make it entertaining.

 

Rights are licensed all the time. You have to be 18 and not a Felon in many states to vote

 

Voting requirements are not making registered voters apply for a "voting license".
A central database of gun owners is illegal in the US.

 

many gun banners would find doctors who think owning a gun makes someone mentally unstable and have those doctors do the examinations

we should do the same thing before people can vote or breed and that would be far better for the country even though equally unconstitutional

 

that's not a license. You apparently don't understand that term

 

Who would be qualified to conduct such an exam? Would they be liable if they passed someone who later commits a massacre?

 

How is this licensing?

 

Was not Jim Crow a form of license ?

 

So what is it then?

 

In regard to what, and so?

The head of the NRA in the 1930's suggested that licensing would be a good idea.

Any licensed psychiatrist and maybe, but I doubt it. They aren't liable now when they release schizophrenics who then go and push people in front of trains.

 

It's a voting requirement. Not a license.

 

We have about 50,000 psychiatrists in the US, and although I don't think all of them are trained to determine who would be a danger, for the same of argument let's assume that they are. There are 80 million gun owners, counting everyone in an average household. That's 1600 new patients for each and every psychiatrist each year. The average psychiatrist spends 48 hours a week in the office and spends 60% of their time with patients. With four weeks vacation each year that's 48 weeks of office hours. That's 1382 available hours for their current patient load plus another 1600 patients every year. Not seeing this as a viable path forward.
https://www.psychiatry.org/resident...ical-students/choosing-a-career-in-psychiatry

 

And the vast majority can be found practicing in the liberal Hollywood left area on the Left Coast for some really strange reason.

 

I really don't have time to explain that. If you don't know what a right is, I am afraid I cannot help.

 

2nd Amendment recognizes the right of Americans to keep guns at home to protect themselves, family and property, and to be part of an armed militia to fight off insurrection/invasion/rebellion when called upon by the Federeral govt. And to form a public militia to repel govt. tyrannty.

however, there is no Constitutionally recognized right to carry a concealed firearm in public outside the context of militia service.

 

In other words, you don't know either

 

OK, so we could have a "Requirement" that you be examined and found sane in order to exercise your right to own a firearm.

 

Sorry, don't trust that I would get an unbiased doctor. Don't trust that if I gave into the lefts gun control scheme that it wouldn't empower them to push for even more anti gun legislation.

 

So what is being stated by yourself, is that there is no point in having matters codified into law, if the laws can be broken, and do nothing to actually prevent a crime from occurring? Is that what is being stated?

The interpretation of yourself does not match what Heller itself states. Nor does it coincide with the McDonald and Caetano rulings which followed and repeated the premise of Heller.

It would not.

A requirement that would be easily subverted through supplying false information, would could not be disproven at the point of sale. There is no legal authority to suspend the legal sale of a firearm in order to perform a home inspection of the person filling out the form.

Beyond such, there is no legal definition of just what "violently insane" amounts to. Without an exact and specific definition, there is no point in further discussion on the matter.

As others have explained, such does not amount to a license being required before one can legally vote.

 

And pray tell, exactly what is this context of militia service that would allow members of the public to legally conceal their firearms?

 

Ah, another race to laxity. How hard was it to find a doctor that said you had a medical "need" for marijuana?

 

actually I do but I tire of anti gun posters who are clueless about things who use ignorance as a debate tactic

 

Classic missdirection

 

I would love to see what constitutes a judgement of sanity. There are many that figure if you disagree with them you must be insane. In a totalitarian society, anyone not correctly following the doctrine of the mob can be judged insane... or a heretic (think Spanish Inquisition).