[JRandomFreeper]

The right to bear "arms" is a right to bear weapons that can be held by your human arms,

Not true. Cannons are legal. And I dang sure can't budge one of my uncle's cannons without a crew. And he lives in California.

/johnny

[backwoods-engineer]

The right to bear "arms" is a right to bear weapons that can be held by your human arms, Not true. Cannons are legal. And I dang sure can't budge one of my uncle's cannons without a crew. And he lives in California.

Cannons are legal, but the Founders sure thought of "arms" as being exactly as I described. Don't have the time to dig up quotes just now, but when the 2nd was being debated, small arms are what was in view.

Now, does that mean crew-served weapons should be prohibited from individual possession? ABSOLUTELY NOT, and I don't believe they should. I'm talking about the purview of the 2nd Amendment and the Constitution (limited Federal powers), which was the original question (tub of deuteride, remember?).

I think government should judge actions, not possession of contraband.

[Kenny Bunk]

There has always been a bit of ab ano thinking going on about the 2d Amendement. It's why you hear candidates ... particularly on the Left ... talking about hunting and deer rifles and shotguns for ducks etc. ad nauseam.

The 2d Amendment has NOTHING to do with putting game on the table. It has two purposes ...
(a)Instant formability of militias and
(b) it is a safeguard against any government using arms AGAINST US!
(c)Along the way it enables free men and women to defend themselves against criminals when seconds count and the police are minutes away

Therefore, if the government has Ma Deuce, I should be able to have Ma Deuce. I don't particularly want to have a machine gun, (not when I can knock either eye out of a sparrow at 600 meters with my trusty Swede Mauser in 6.5X55 ...honest) but if my fellow potential militia men do, good show! Were this country ever occupied, the occupiers would suffer heavy casualties from even the humble .22 long rifle hollow point, which in the right hands can do heavy damage at 100 yards,(since many of us can very quickly put 10 in a 1-ft circle at that range!) the shooter then perhaps picking himself up an AK or other heavier weapon. Scoped .308s, even 30-30's, which are the ballistic equivalent of the 7.62X39, would certainly make invading this outfit a costly business ... as the Nazis, Commies, Japs knew. And what the Legft conveniently ignores in all their condescending prattle about shooting ducks with Pa's old shotgun... or more than likely they'll say "rifle."

Hunting? Lots of fun. Got nothing to do with the Constitution.