I would like to be an "absolutist" about this point- to include any certificate or license requirement, background check, registration, or restriction as to kind (design type) of "firearm" - I would question ANYTHING that infringes.
Honestly, I don't know if being so absolute is reasonable. Some people should not have weapons. Some of those are friends and some are family. (wink... wink)
The Strongest Possible Restrictive Language
First and Second Amendment protections were always given the very strongest possible restrictive language – no law shall be passed – shall make no law – inviolable – not be deprived or abridged – not be restrained - shall not be infringed - nor shall the right be infringed - shall make no laws touching - shall make no laws to infringe. The Second Amendment's “right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" language was clearly not intended to allow for extensive reasonable regulation. Rather, it was intended to prevent all laws and regulations that would result in the people being deprived, abridged, restrained, narrowed, or restricted in the exercise of their fundamental right to keep and bear arms.
David Young
click: SOURCE
Thanks.
As is your post above.
FReegards,
SirL