12-09-2015, 02:28 PM
(12-09-2015, 02:15 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sure he has a right; it's called the 2nd Amendment. There is nothing illegal about his ownership, so he has a 2nd Amendment Right to own such a weapon until such a time when/if the ownership becomes illegal.
If he had a right to own such a weapon then bans would not be upheld on such weapons. To have a right to something means the government cannot make it illegal for you to carry out the action or to own something. Since the precedent is currently that the government can make it illegal to own such a firearm, there is no right to it. According to the courts we have a right to own firearms on an individual level, but that right is not unlimited and the government can ban certain types. Those types of firearms the government has the ability to ban are firearms we do not have the right to possess.
