Replies

The feds already regulate other gun parts, including the minimum length of a rifle barrel or shotgun barrel. The Supremes decided (incorrectly) that this was constitutional in United States v. Miller, where they ruled that the feds could regulate shotgun barrel length because:

"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument."

The Supremes added:

"The significance attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."

I find it disturbing how willing liberals are to make things up to support doing what they want, especially taking money and weapons from law-abiding citizens. The reversal from banning a gun because it didn't strike them as military enough to today's efforts to ban guns that strike them as too military is classic liberal dishonesty.

I disagree with Miller on shotgun barrel length, both because more than 30,000 sawed off shotguns had in fact been used in trench warfare and guarding prisoners in WWI and because the actual wording does not restrict the right to keep and bear arms to only military arms. I agree with Miller that the militia is at the very least "all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense" (and by extension, females have the same RKBA just as women have all the other fundamental legal and human rights possessed by men).

While the ruling states: The Constitution, as originally adopted, granted to the Congress power, "To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union . . .", the Second Amendment does not only exist so that Congress can call out the militia when necessary. The reverse is also true as demonstrated by the commentary from the Founding Fathers - the Second Amendment exists so that the militia can call out the Congress when necessary.