Skip to comments.How About Banning Bullets? The Constitution Doesn't Say Anything About Those...
Posted on 12/24/2012 1:49:44 PM PST by blam
How About Banning Bullets? The Constitution Doesn't Say Anything About Those...
December 24, 2012, 1:56 PM
It's Time We Saw The Idea That Everyone Should Carry An Assault Weapon For What It Is: Nuts One of the arguments invoked by those who think we should keep assault weapons freely available in this country is that the Constitution says we have a right to own and buy them.
The Constitution actually doesn't say anything of the sort.
All the Constitution says is that we have the right to "bear arms."
And that "right to bear arms" is actually supposed to support the existence of a "well-regulated militia," an important qualifying clause in the Second Amendment that those in favor of free access to assault weapons usually ignore.
But even leaving aside the "well-regulated militia" clause, the Constitution doesn't specify what "arms" we're allowed to bear.
And we have long set limits on the type of arms we are allowed to bear, thus establishing clearly that we have the Constitutional right to do that.
For example, we're not (individually) allowed to own aircraft carriers, tanks, ballistic nuclear missiles, fighter aircraft, or attack submarines.
We're not even allowed to own fully automatic machine guns.
All of those are "arms."
And yet we have established that, despite the Second Amendment, we're not individually allowed to bear them.
So if we decided to establish that we are not individually allowed to bear semi-automatic assault rifles and pistols while still being allowed to own single-shot hunting guns, this would be perfectly in keeping with how we have interpreted our Second Amendment rights under the Constitution.
But it will still make lots of people scream that we have tromped all over the Constitution, even if we haven't.
So, how about if we limit
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Well just us tax slaves!
Actually it has no legal significance whatsoever. It's only the "shall" clause that matters.
Don’t bother leaving a comment on that commie site. It will be removed immediately so as not to scare the mice.
Ammunition is an integral part of a firearm just like the trigger or firing pin.
Bullets are “arms.”
..............and, let’s just say I came into a Trillion dollars and decided I wanted to buy an aircraft carrier!
...........where is the law that would stop me?
Bushy’s website is again taking orders for 30 & 40-rnd 5.56/.223 mags. Need some?
One of the components that make up cartridges are "bullets".
Or paper. OR perhaps the governmemt could impose limits: Clothes, wine, olive presses allowed, printing presses restricted.
After looking at the regs what I proposed would be illegal because I received them by mail. Tanks anyway.
Looks like I may have to drive to the VA gun show to find them.
Liberal logic is an assault on sanity and should be banned.
It would be nice if these jerks would consult a dictionary once in a while. The term "regulated" doesn't always mean "restricted by government." It also means "put in good order," and "conforming to a standard." This just might mean that the militia, when "well-regulated," is actually properly equipped for action, not restricted by idiotic gun-control laws.
that is the collectivst perception of rights.
the USSC has now established the second like the rest of the amendments 1-9 are individual rights.
You don't get a license, you pay a $200.00 Federal excise tax and file an BATF Form 4. The completed form (& certified check for the tax stamp) goes to the Class III holder of a Federal Firearms Licensed (FFL) dealer from whom you are buying the weapon. Said dealer must operate his business in your state of residence FYI.
The dealer then fill out his portion of the form, listing a description of the weapon, serial number, name and address of his business and license holder's signature. He then forwards the completed form and certified check to a BATF examiner for processing. This process can take upwards of six months or more.
When the form is approved it is mailed back to the dealer who then notifies you that you may come and pick up your purchase. You make multiple copies of the Form 4 with the attached excise tax stamp and put the original in a safe deposit box as it is your only proof that you are the legitimate owner of a machine gun.
You can use a copy to ward off curious local cops but if the ATF asks to see the original you'd best be able to produce it promptly. You need to carry a copy when ever your MG leaves you property (say you drive to the range) should the need arise for proof of ownership.
Do not plan on crossing your state line while in position of your MG without checking with states along your route regarding their local laws regarding Class III weapons in transport. A Check with your (by now) friendly BATF contact what they advise.
If sometime you chose to relocate you will need to update the BATF with your new address. Likewise, if you move out of state, you need to research your new potential home for restrictions on Class III goodies. Again, you must keep BATF appraised as to the new location of your high priced toy. All it takes is patience and money and you too can "rock & Roll".
PS The same procedures are used when purchasing short barreled shotguns and rifles, suppressors, and "dangerous devices"(bore greater than .50 cal), or any other weapon.
PPS Successfully completing a BATF Form 4 is much easier if you set up a trust to hold your Class III purchases. If you want to know why FReep mail me directly.
Howard Hughs owned the biggest plane in the world. He had a ship for “exploring” the Global Challenger which was used to retrieve a Russian sub.
How about we ban bears? we may have a right to bear arms, but if there are no bears to cut the arms off of, then the problem would be solved, no.
I, for one, would never have a couple of bear arms in my home, but respect the Constitutional right to have them.
this is acutally a brilliant idea. has anyone thought of applying it to heroin, cocaine, or meth? Maybe we should ban drunk drivers.
Why we should give crooked former securities analyst Henry Blodget the time of day, no less ventilate over his silly contribution to the people-control narrative is beyond me.
More interesting and encouraging are testimonies like this:
Gun Restrictions Have Always Bred Defiance, Black Markets - J.D. Tuccille|Dec. 22, 2012 1:00 pm http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/22/gun-restrictions-have-always-bred-defian/print
and this study referenced in Tuccille’s piece: http://www.anarma.org/descargas/documentacion/Gun-control-and-reduction-FCsaszar.pdf
Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American . . . . The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
Tench Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette (February 20, 1788)