Jump to content

See the 9th Circuit in Action - Oral Argument in En Banc review of California's Mag Ban

Recommended Posts

They kept trying to turn it around to a question of how many rounds do you need in the average SD encounter.

That's irrelevant. They are not limiting how many rounds a person can have (yet).

Magazines are considered an "arm" under 2A because they are a vital part of a functioning firearm. Magazines over 10 rounds are in common usage therefore are not unusual. Weapons that are dangerous AND unusual fall outside of 2A protections. If they are not unusual their danger is immaterial. A total prohibition of something protected by 2A fails any level of scrutiny.

It is only politics and hoplophobia that drives these arguments.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole "common usage" is a red herring.  SD is another.

The 2nd is not about SD, its not about hunting, its not about common usage.  It is to make sure the people have and retain the capability to throw off an oppressive government.

Thats why it says "right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Not "the right to keep and bear man portable arms in common usage shall not be infringed."

Remember when the USC was ratified, the most powerful arms in existence were cannons, which were often owned by individuals or groups of individuals.

  • Agree 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...