Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
‘Military-Style’ Firearms Aren’t Protected By Second Amendment, Court Rules
#18
(02-24-2017, 12:14 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I don't know why we can't have a simple law saying explosives aren't arms.  It would take away a lot of the extreme stupid arguments.  "Well does that mean you can own a howitzer?"

This is the whole issue with the amendment we are guessing what they "really" meant. If you needed a militia to possibly have to rise up again, or fight a war, then that militia probably needed both small arms as well as artillery.





Messages In This Thread
RE: ‘Military-Style’ Firearms Aren’t Protected By Second Amendment, Court Rules - Au165 - 02-24-2017, 12:22 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)