The right to bear arms is a very specific right under the second amendment. Take that out of the constitution and suddenly all the arguments for owning a gun are done.
That is incorrect. The Second Amendment protects our rights. But we can still argue in favor of our rights without it.
We will also prevent anyone from taking the Second Amendment out of the Constitution.
Civil Rights definition: are the rights of an individual to receive equal treatment under the law.
That is one civil right, not the sum total of all civil rights.
As long as we take all the assault rifles you have been treated equally and your civil rights have not been violated.
That is incorrect. Laws are only permitted to impact a Constitutional right if there is a good justification for having the law. There is no justification for banning pistol grips, so any such ban is unconstitutional.
You can not own a Thompson submachine gun and neither can anyone else.
Yes I can and yes they can.
If the right to bear arms existed before the Constitution why bother to put in in the Constitution.
So the Constitution would protect the right.
There is a simple way to end this argument take a case that was argued before the court remove the second amendment and the case fails.
We will not allow the Second Amendment to be removed.
I have never seen a court case about guns that sighted any preexisting “right” to bear arms.
U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876)
"This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed; but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress."
Lots of guns have pistol grips including all pistols.
Yes. Assault weapons laws focus on pistol grips on long guns however.
The AR-15 was designed as a weapon of war as other assault weapons also and they used by armies around the world.
That is incorrect. The AR-15 is semi-auto-only. Armies use weapons with at least a burst-fire function, if not true full auto.
In order for NRA gun manufacturers to sell to professional school shooters they are modified slightly to keep them from firing fully automatic because they would be illegal.
The NRA is not a gun manufacturer.
AR-15s are semi-auto-only as built. They do not need to be modified.
Every gun with a pistol grip is not an assault weapon.
Every long gun with a pistol grip is. That is what "assault weapon" means: a long gun with a pistol grip.
It is easy to pick out the weapons designed for war and the copy cat versions.
Having a pistol grip on a rifle does not make it a weapon of war.
We know what specific weapons are used in mass murder.
If people were murdered with a rifle that didn't have a pistol grip, would they be any less dead?
Guns used frequently in mass murders is an excellent reason to ban any weapon.
That is incorrect. The pistol grip does not make the weapon any more useful for murder.
The technology was state of the art when the second amendment passed. No one can see into the future there was no possible way the founding fathers could foresee the problem of mass murder of school children we are facing today. They can only pass a law that covers the technology of the time. There no concept under the law that entitles anyone to future technological advances because it completely changes the equation. Do you really think the Internet is not censored? If it wasn’t all 10 years old would be bombarded by adds for porn every 2 seconds.
Laws protecting minors from porn are allowed because they can be justified as having a good reason for existing.
The government is not allowed to ban all political speech on the internet. Trump would not be able to prevent you from criticizing him for example.
This is because you are wrong about our rights being limited to technology from 1791. The right to free speech very much applies to the internet.
The wiretap laws evolved based on right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure.
Had you been correct about rights only applying to technology from 1791, wiretap laws would not exist, because the right to be free from search and seizure would not apply to telephones.
The Heller decision is about hand guns and assault weapons are not hand guns.
True. But it does say that we have the right to have guns, and modern guns at that.
The ban on automatic weapons has been in place since 1934 and all the NRA lawyers could not break it.
No. Since 1986. With all full auto weapons already legally registered by 1986 being grandfathered.
That tells you that you may have a right to bear an arm but also tells the government can place limits on the type of guns sold or possessed.
Yes, but limits on rights are only allowed if that limit can be justified with a good reason.
No one is going to come up with a good reason for banning pistol grips on a long gun.
The Thompson submachine guns were banned in 1934 and the mere possession of one subject to heavy penalties.
No they weren't.
Certain collectors with a very expensive gun license can still own them.
So as I said, they weren't banned.
Some state laws do require an owner to have a license, but that license is not expensive at all.
Federal law requires the payment of a $200 tax when the gun is registered -- also not very expensive.
Someone with a semiautomatic can fire nearly as many rounds as a fully automatic as we found out in Las Vegas. So, if you don’t need a full automatic you don’t need a semi-automatic to fire a hundred rounds a minute either.
It doesn't matter what we need. It matters if a limitation on our rights can be justified with a good reason.
Good luck banning semi-autos. Lots of popular hunting weapons are semi-auto. The hunting community will vote Democrats out of office if they start banning hunting weapons.
The NRA is about to encounter an overwhelming force in this country.
LOL. I wouldn't call children throwing temper tantrums an overwhelming force.
the NRA is going to do exactly what the gun store in FL that sold the AR-15 that killed 17 people close up because they are afraid they are going to eat the guns they sold.
No. We are going to continue to protect our civil rights.
Only a coward owns a gun if it is not required for your job. That is what the NRA is and that is why they own so many guns they are afraid of their own shadow. That is why you buy a gun in the first place you’re afraid. A brave man dies only once but a coward suffers a thousand deaths.
Like most bigoted stereotypes, that is pure nonsense.
People buy guns for all sorts of reasons. Recreational shooting for example. Or hunting.
People who buy guns in order to be prepared for self defense are not necessarily fearful any more than people are fearful if they wear seat belts or buy fire extinguishers.
And if someone were in genuine fear for their life, buying a gun would be a sign of wisdom, not cowardice.
What the NRA doesn’t understand is that gun owners are a minority in America now and you can see the demonstrations against guns getting bigger. The biggest political donor in FL has told the politicians he will no longer contribute to any politician who is progun, the governor included. The NRA has bought the government and the court system but that won’t last. In ever political movement there is a tipping point and we are way past the tipping point now. Have you heard the NRA speaking out lately? No, they crawled into a hole and covered their head after the mass murders took place?
All of our levers of power over Congress remain fully intact.
And the courts don't strike down unconstitutional gun laws because the NRA tells them to. They do it because those laws are unconstitutional.
The streets are full of guns that can be converted to fully automatics in a few minutes.
Only if you have the right parts and are a trained gunsmith.
You may not know of any attempt to make the weapons fully automatic but one of the shooter’s friends in FL told him how he could make the AR-!5 fully automatic and where to buy the parts.
If the shooter wasn't a trained gunsmith he would have most likely just ruined his gun.
And I doubt he could have found a trained gunsmith to do the conversion for him.
When Obama was elected a meeting was held by Republicans they decided they would block every single thing Obama did.
That is Democratic propaganda to cover up Obama's failures as a president. The Republicans tried working with him during his first term. The deal they were making collapsed when Obama listened to leftist extremists and backed out of it.
The NRA had nothing at all to do with the Republican obstruction.
Setting aside the fact that there wasn't Republican obstruction, what the NRA did was stop Obama's gun control effort after he wasted every last bit of his political capital on it.
The reason Obama never achieved anything in his second term is because after wasting all of his political capital attacking the NRA, he had nothing left to push any other legislation.
The big money donors are turning away from the Republicans.
List are now being compiled of who took the NRA blood money and how much. They are being published on the Internet.
What you can count is several more mass murders before election day people are tired of mass murder.
Let me see if I understand that if you get social security for mental illness it has nothing to do with mental illness?
The law in question had nothing to do with mental illness.
Sorry the particular mental illness were listed in detail.
Nonsense. The law did not deal with mental illness at all.
Trump just gave the mentally the right to buy AR-15 a year ago.
That law had nothing to do with mental illness.
Those guns are expensive It may take them some time it will happen watch.
One part of the SHARE Act will allow cheap AK-47s to flood into the country (semi-auto-only of course). That should make assault weapons more affordable to poor people.
In this country the mentally ill have no right to own a gun just as felons can’t own guns.
The law is actually focused only on dangerous people. Not all mentally ill people are dangerous. In fact, most are not.