[mbraynard]

Ok - good point.

So is any restriction on choice of arms unconstitutional? How do you reconcile this right with the increasingly potent choice of arms that are available today versus during the revolution?

I'm not trying to be advasarial with you, just thoughtful. My biggest concern is that the Constitution becomes either a death pact or wholly discarded if either a lot of wisdom doesn't come out of the decisions here.

[Inyo-Mono]

Ok - good point.

So is any restriction on choice of arms unconstitutional? How do you reconcile this right with the increasingly potent choice of arms that are available today versus during the revolution?

I'm not trying to be advasarial with you, just thoughtful. My biggest concern is that the Constitution becomes either a death pact or wholly discarded if either a lot of wisdom doesn't come out of the decisions here.

The 2nd never has been a "death pact." If some gang banger pulls out a fully automatic weapon and fires on a neighborhood, shouldn't those residents have the right to return fire with similar weapons? And if we all were armed, with no restrictions, don't you beleive that the bad guys would have second thoughts about shooting first?

In the early 1900s, before state and Federal gun laws, when anyone could carry arms without restrictions, the crime rate was really low, something like 200 murders per year in the entire U.S.

[Atlas Sneezed]

So is any restriction on choice of arms unconstitutional?

---

PLEASE read the decision below.

It makes it clear that a ban on a whole category of arms is unacceptable, while admitting that its ruling would have no effect on a host of other restrictions.

[William Tell]

mbraynard said: "How do you reconcile this right with the increasingly potent choice of arms that are available today versus during the revolution? "

It's called "the amendment process". You don't expect the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to just automatically adjust itself to changing conditions, do you?

And what do you think are the chances that the super-majority of Congress and the super-majority of state legislatures that are needed to amend are going to ratify an amendment permitting the outlawing of some rifles because they have a bayonet lug?

If there are restrictions that the people of the US will approve to the protected right to keep and bear arms we will never know as long as a simple majority is allowed to infringe the right.