[dcwusmc]

You STILL have not read the decision, have you? Otherwise you would have to stop this inane babbling. Oh, and since sawed-off shotguns HAVE BEEN used in combat, I guess that does, in fact, make them militia weapons.

[robertpaulsen]

"You STILL have not read the decision, have you?"

Why do you ask? Is the decision the Holy Grail of court decisions? Is it the final word? Is this the way it will now be forever and ever? Game over? Put it in the bank?

I'm saying -- you either put this decision in perspective or we're gonna lose, big time.

"Oh, and since sawed-off shotguns HAVE BEEN used in combat, I guess that does, in fact, make them militia weapons."

So have spears. Doesn't mean they have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.

I told you before, the argument is not, and has never been, about what type of weapon can or has been used in combat. The argument is what "arms" the second amendment protects.

[tpaine]

"Oh, and since sawed-off shotguns HAVE BEEN used in combat, I guess that does, in fact, make them militia weapons."

Try to understand how communities 'rule' in the USA. Morton Grove can decide what "arms" they will protect.

Handguns are out, spears are OK.