The “militia” mentioned in the 2nd amendment was defined in several rulings by the SCOTUS as a body of citizens organized for military purposes. They then went on to say that when summoned to appear as members of the militia, they were expected to appear with weapons supplied by themselves and of the type in common military use at the time. (Presser vs Illinois, Miller)
Accordingly, the firearms that that citizen militia should have access to should have the most direct military utility of those available. For example, the AR-15 in 5.56 NATO configuration is the closest modern equivalent to the Brown Bess musket for an armed citizenry. It’s ammo is interchangeable with standard military ammunition, almost all of it’s parts; save those of the fire control group that enable selective fire options, are interchangeable with Mi6/M4 variants also.
Semi-auto fire from an individual non belt fed shoulder firearm is superior to full auto fire for most tactical situations anyway, save for gaining initial fire superiority, suppressive fire, the final stages of an assault, and when firing along final protective lines in a defensive situation.
We must not be afraid to DEMAND access to military grade firearms, of whatever type, for the individual militia soldier. The 2nd amendment ain’t about shooting bunny rabbits. It is about protecting the community from internal and external threats, and opposing tyranny. In short “NECESSARY to the security of a FREE state.”
If the 2nd amendment isn’t about firearms SPECIFICALLY designed for military use, then the constitutional rationale for it is severely weakened.
Exactly correct.
As usual, the left is willing to lie, obfuscate and contradict itself to obtain what it wants.
They *insisted* the 2nd Amendment was all about the militia... until ... the obvious consequences are pointed out.
Then they insist that it is *not* about the militia, or military purposes.
When you start from the premises that the Constitution is an impediment, that lying to the people is always necessary to good government, and there is *no* higher authority than the government, the rest follows.
they were expected to appear with weapons supplied by themselves and of the type in common military use at the time. (Presser vs Illinois, Miller)
Which is precisely why they are so hot to ban them.