You'll find, as you go deeper down this particular rabbit hole, that guns cause friends...not crime. - Me


Supreme Court Precedent and how we can apply it.

Posted this at my FB, thought I'd share it here too. Edited for emphasis and errors, and to clean up the text to make it easier to read.
So, I've been hearing more and more from people that know nothing of the law saying that we need to ban high capacity magazines, semi-auto rifles and anything else they think is scary looking. Typically saying that neither DC v Heller or McDonald v Chicago enumerated the right for semi-auto rifles in self-defense. Well if you truly wish to apply the law and precedent from SCOTUS rulings, lets look at that shall we. One case cited in DC v Heller was:

US v Miller.
Supreme Court ruled that the 1934 NFA did not violate Miller's 2nd Amendment rights as a short barreled shotgun (a shotgun with a barrel length less than 18 inches) was not a weapon in common usage by the milita, ie: The standing army at the time. Lets dig a little deeper into this precedent. If we apply the ruling today a ban on a semi-auto rifle and the magazines to feed ammo to it, would be a violation of the Second Amendment.

... Standard issue arms for an individual soldier now would include among the following: M-16/M4 SELECT FIRE battle rifle with multiple 30rd magazines, M249SAW or M240B belt fed light-machine gun - fed from a 200rd belt, 40mm grenade launcher - commonly using a high explosive fragmentation round, AT4 anti-tank rocket - uses a high explosive shaped charge warhead in the rocket, M67 fragmentation grenades - nuff said.

So yes please, lets apply Supreme Court precedent in this case, please please please, can we apply the Supreme Court precedent?

1 comment:

Wilson said...

I wish they would. I would love a SCAR Heavy with a short barrel and 40mm grenade launcher. I’ll even promise the anti’s to find something to hunt with it.