62 By noting that the reason Miller lost was because the court didn’t think a sawed-off shotgun was useful for national defense.
... then what about the M1918 and M1928A1 ...
Posted on 11/20/2017 7:45:10 AM PST by Cheerio
Doug Jones, the Democrat running for Alabama’s U.S. Senate seat, says he loves to hunt but the Second Amendment has “limitations.”
He believes that every right enumerated in the Bill of Rights is limited, and the Second Amendment is no exception.
According to the Alabama Political Reporter, Jones described himself as “a Second Amendment guy,” but stressed that some gun control is necessary. He said, “We’ve got limitations on all constitutional amendments in one form or another.” This position is contrary to the clear language of the amendment, which states that the right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed.”
He stressed that he loves to hunt but still believes in “smart” gun laws.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
“And SCOTUS ruled exactly that, in US vs. Miller.
Then how do you reconcile the 1934 National Firearm Act with the SCOTUS Miller decision?”
The Court clearly moved away from Miller. You don’t have to reconcile it.
Besides, there is no conflict. Miller said a firearm must be particularly useful in a militia setting and decided a sawed off shotgun wasn’t ... so the rulings are the same.
By noting that the reason Miller lost was because the court didn’t think a sawed-off shotgun was useful for national defense.
A militia is wholly dependent on armed citizens, and thus cannot exist without armed citizens. Armed citizens, on the other hand, are not at all dependent on a militia, and can exist without a militia.
Woodrow Wilson hated the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights. And he didn’t try to hide that hatred.
Thought he meant smart guns like self driving smart cars.
Unless you define “militia” as the set of all citizens who are armed. Which is the way it’s defined even now in Federal law, and as it was commonly defined when the Constitution was written.
Which just makes my point: Militia is wholly dependent on an armed citizenry, and cannot exist without an armed citizenry.
A book library is wholly dependent on books, and cannot exist without books. But books can exist — and people can read them — without a library.
Doug, the 2A is about citizens arming against a government that is for the elite. Do you ever read the Constitution or do you think it is outdated like all you Marxists think?
This guy can go F himself.
I can’t even carry a knife here in crazy NYC. I would LOVE to be able to own and carry a firearm.
The second amendment doesn’t have limitations. I would however draw the line at nukes.
Yes, to have a militia, one must have an armed citizenry. By definition of ‘militia.’
Smart guns means the government can turn them off....whenever they want.
A couple of smart congress critters wouldn't hurt any.
62 By noting that the reason Miller lost was because the court didn’t think a sawed-off shotgun was useful for national defense.
... then what about the M1918 and M1928A1 ...
Those aren’t SCOTUS rulings.
Doug Jones most likely threw away his chance to win with that statement.
Can you say Senator-Elect Roy Moore?
If the Second has limits, so too do ALL the others. But we'll begin with the First: Those who say anything we don't like that *offends us* may be shot at will. Traitors may be hanged without benefit of trial, if they confess after waterboarding.
Well, technically, when I do it, it's Diesel fuel-boarding....
“Well, technically, when I do it, it’s Diesel fuel-boarding....”
You have an evil streak.
I approve.
L
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.