View Single Post
  #442   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
HeyBub[_3_] HeyBub[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,538
Default Fine, try GUN CONTROL

Jim Yanik wrote:

In the context of the owner being part of a citizen's militia, in the
context of having access to said gun (musket) during times of civil
defence against an foreign invader.


WRONG. there's NO language in the 2nd that requires one to be in a
militia to have the RKBA. NONE whatsoever.
ALL the 2nd says about militias is that they are "necessary to a free
state",nothing more.

It CLEARLY states the "right of the PEOPLE" to keep and bear arms,not
"of a militia".


Let's clear this up: In 1791 the definition of "militia" was every
able-bodied man and boy capable of defending the state. The difference
between "militia" and "citizen" was minimal ("militia" did not include
women, children, or slaves) and did NOT demand adherence to a military
regimen.

Likewise, the word "regulated" in the 2nd Amendment was not close to today's
common meaning. Today, one usually thinks of "regulated" as "following
regulations," but in 1791 there were NO regulations to speak of. Back then,
the common use of "regulated" meant a mechanical device that works as
intended. We see vestiges of this definition in statements such as "a
well-regulated timepiece."


semi-auto,magazine-fed rifles such as the AR-15 and AK-47 are today's
modern MILITIA weapons,and thus should be the most protected of
firearms under the Second Amendment.

Militiamen were expected to appear for muster bearing arms and ammo
similar to and compatible with what the Regular military had in use
AT THAT TIME. Since we "compromised" and restricted ownership of
full-auto,true assault rifles,that leaves the semi-auto versions for
civilian militia use.

In US v Miller,SCOTUS asked if a short-barreled shotgun was a weapon
that a militia would commonly use,implying that arms protected by the
2nd Amendment had to be arms a militia would use. AR-15's,M-16's and
AK-47s would be ordinary militia arms,and "hi-capacity magazines"
also would be protected.



Fortunately, SCOTUS has eradicated that tortured definition. The 2nd
Amendment NOW means any weapon a person might use for self-defense (Heller)
and extended that definition to the entire country (McDonald).