So? But didn't work out well for Michael Dunn when he was threatened with loud music. But if you want to ignore the most important ruling on the scope of the Second Amendment by the supreme court of the country, that's up to you. Miller's holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those "in common use at the time" finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons." The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. "2) Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. I just have this feeling they would have written that amendment a little bit tighter if they could have seen the future of firearms. It would be interesting to see how James Madison and John Adams would feel about the 2nd Amendment today in light of the capabilities of modern automatic and semi-automatic weapons and the high murder rate in the US. Why is that? One may still pull the trigger fast on that semi-auto weapon and spray a lot of bullets but the semi-auto weapon is legal. Often the only difference between a legal weapon and a prohibited one is that the legal one is semi-automatic and the illegal one is fully automatic.
The courts seem to be ok requiring a Federal license to own a fully automatic rifle but give a pass to semi-automatic rifles of the same caliber with the same large capacity magazines and very nearly the same rate of fire. The US Constitution doesn't define "arms". One could read the 2nd Amendment to say Americans have a right to any kind of "arms", up to shoulder fired missiles, heavy machine guns, even mortars. There is no distinction in the 2nd Amendment between civil and military grade weapons because in that era there was no difference. The Winchester repeating rifle would not appear until the Civil War. Those along with mass production on assembly lines would not come along until the Civil War. There was no such thing as interchangeable parts. Guns were crafted one at a time and each was unique and expensive. Two rounds per minute maybe if you're good. The 2nd Amendment was written at a time when guns had to be reloaded through the barrel after each shot, first with gunpowder, then wadding and then a ball.
America likes to hold itself up as the beacon of a nation to follow.of course most everyone else knows that the rest of the world simply rolls their eyes and sniggers when our friends from the 50 states roll this trope out.no one in the 1st world wants to copy the US 7 Getting them all off the streets quickly and efficiently would be difficult and time consuming. Right now there are simply a phenomenal amount of guns in circulation, both legal and illegal. That's not to say that there wouldn't be big problems during the transition phase if the US did the same. The NEXT day, hand guns were declared illegal (rifles and shotguns for hunting are still legal but with a rigorous process to get a licence to hold one) and do you know how many gun deaths there have been in schools since then? None. Other countries live perfectly peacefully without guns and enjoy the same "freedoms" that America keeps on crowing about.with a TINY percentage of gun deaths.never mind gun deaths at school!! Scotland had 1 school shooting, where a weirdo member of a gun club went into a local primary school in Dunblane and killed a bunch of primary school kids and their teacher before shooting himself. It's ridiculous to see grown adults say that their shouldn't be controls on guns.