So you don't believe that today's prohibition on the manufacture of machineguns for civilian use, an extension of the NFA 34, violates the individual right to own such machineguns? Again, you are very much in the minority around here.
Sometimes you claim there is no right.
Sometimes you claim the right is only for militias or states.
Sometimes you claim that there is a right, but it must be protected by the states.
I don't think I am alone in being unable to make sense of your position.
I'm still trying to get you on record regarding whether the pre-existing right mentioned in the Second Amendment included self-defense.
The second amendment never protected that right. You say it does and is being violated. You have yet to support that.
"Sometimes you claim there is no right."
Nope. Never did. It's a natural right. I've said that time and again.
"Sometimes you claim the right is only for militias or states."
No, sometimes I claim the right is protected for members of a Militia.
You have this bad habit of claiming a right then acting as though it should be allowed because it's a right. "We have a right to keep and bear arms and you can't take that away" "We have a right to self defense whch means you can't stop me from using a gun".
Blah, blah, blah. You have a right. Yeah, so? We all have rights. My question to you is, is it protected and who protects it? That's all that matters.
So cool it with your pre-existing rights. List 50 of them and I'll agree with every one. List 1000.
All that matters is, is it protected and who protects it?