Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: blam

“The right to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed”, says a lot. However, one COULD argue that it does NOT say those “arms” can/cannot be loaded. Hmmmmmmmmm?


3 posted on 02/25/2013 6:25:28 AM PST by Progov
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Progov

However, one COULD argue that it does NOT say those “arms” can/cannot be loaded.


If they are not loaded, they are not really arms.

Regarding the case in question, though, I think “shall not be infringed” is pretty clear.


24 posted on 02/25/2013 6:59:50 AM PST by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Progov
“The right to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed”, says a lot. However, one COULD argue that it does NOT say those “arms” can/cannot be loaded. Hmmmmmmmmm?

They picked that up in 1043, an unloaded firearm will be considered a deadly weapon.

HB13-1043
Modify Definition Of Deadly Weapon

Under current law, for the purposes of criminal law, a deadly weapon is defined as a firearm, whether loaded or unloaded; a knife; a bludgeon; or any other weapon, device, instrument, material, or substance, whether animate or inanimate, that in the manner it is used or intended to be used is capable of producing death or serious bodily injury.The bill modifies this definition so that a firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, qualifies as a deadly weapon regardless of the manner in which it is used or intended to be used.

29 posted on 02/25/2013 7:23:14 AM PST by JMJJR ( Newspeak is the official language of Oceania)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Progov

would “bare” arms mean open carry? :)

I support your right to arm bears.


33 posted on 02/25/2013 7:36:23 AM PST by NonValueAdded (If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, you've likely misread the situation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Progov
The right to...bare arms

There is no such right.


38 posted on 02/25/2013 8:28:20 AM PST by Jim Noble (When strong, avoid them. Attack their weaknesses. Emerge to their surprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Progov
I wonder what they have to say about open carry, hmmmmmm


49 posted on 02/25/2013 8:55:47 AM PST by Obama_Is_Sabotaging_America (PRISON AT BENGHAZI?????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Progov
Doesn't matter either way. There was no power given to the government to make such a finding. Especially for a Federal Circuit court.

Carrying concealed is a method of BEARING armaments. As such, it is protected. No matter how many black robed perverts claim otherwise.

63 posted on 02/25/2013 9:53:38 AM PST by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson