Articles, Blog

2nd Amendment DOESN’T Protect AR’s?! – The Legal Brief


Welcome back to The Legal Brief, the show
where we CRUSH the various legal myths and misinformation surrounding various areas of
the gun world. I’m your host Adam Kraut and today we are
discussing the recent decision from the 4th Circuit that found America’s Rifle is not
protected by the
Second Amendment. Recently the 4th Circuit issued a very unwelcome
decision en banc in Kolbe v. Hogan which proclaimed that “assault weapons” and “large capacity”
magazines are not protected by the Second Amendment, a determination that has the gun
community up in arms. A few points of order before we talk about
the decision itself. For those that don’t know, en banc is when
the Court sits as a whole to hear a case. In this instance, it was heard before 14 judges
rather than the typical 3 judge panel. In order for a court to hear a case en banc
it can either do so on its own or a party can petition the court for a rehearing. The other point is that the Fourth Circuit
covers Maryland, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina. So if you live in a state such as Wisconsin,
Maine or Texas, this decision does not directly affect you. Kolbe challenged Maryland’s Firearm Safety
Act of 2013 (“FSA”), which bans AR-15s and other military-style rifles and shotguns
as well as detachable large capacity magazines, by contesting the constitutionality of the
law under the Second Amendment, as well as bringing a Fourteenth Amendment Due Process
and Equal Protection claim. For the purposes of our discussion, we will
only cover the Second Amendment aspect. At the District Court, the judge ruled that
the FSA was constitutional. While analyzing the Second Amendment claims,
the Court expressed doubt that “assault weapons” and “large capacity magazines”
were protected by the Second Amendment. In its decision the Court employed an intermediate
scrutiny analysis. When a court employs an intermediate scrutiny
analysis, it looks to see whether the challenged law furthers an important government interest
by means that are substantially related to that interest. In this instance, the District Court found
that Maryland’s law furthered the important interest of providing for public safety and
preventing crime and did so in a manner that substantially furthered that interest. Intermediate scrutiny does not require that
the manner in which that interest is furthered be the least burdensome. The Court looked at evidence presented by
the parties as to the capabilities of certain firearms, etc. to arrive at this conclusion. The decision is in the description if you
want to read it. Kolbe appealed to the 4th Circuit and a three
judge panel reversed the District Court’s decision. The panel found that the Second Amendment
protected the rifles and magazines that were banned by the FSA. Of equal importance, the three judge panel
found that the appropriate level of scrutiny to analyze the constitutionality of the FSA
was strict scrutiny. Again, quick lesson for those that don’t
know, under a strict scrutiny analysis, the law must further a compelling governmental
interest and must have been narrowly tailored to achieve that interest. Simply put, the law must be written in the
least restrictive means possible in order to further a compelling governmental interest. As you may have guessed, the three judge panel
kicked it back to the District Court to decide the case in accordance with the panel’s
decision, that is until the hearing en banc was granted. And before all of you give up hope in the
federal judiciary, I think you’ll appreciate this brief excerpt from the decision. “The meaning of the Constitution does not
depend on a popular vote of the circuits and it is neither improper nor imprudent for us
to disagree with the other circuits addressing this issue. We are not a rubber stamp. We require strict scrutiny here not because
it aligns with our personal policy preferences but because we believe it is compelled by
the law…” Unfortunately, what would have been a welcomed
difference in opinion between the circuit courts was overruled when the case was reheard
en banc. It was all too happy to reaffirm the District
Court’s opinion in part. However, unlike the District Court, it made
an explicit statement, that has gun owners very upset. The 4th Circuit en banc declared that “contrary
to the now-vacated decision of our prior panel — the banned assault weapons and large-capacity
magazines are not protected by the Second Amendment. That is, we are convinced that the banned
assault weapons and large-capacity magazines are among those arms that are ‘like’ ‘M-16
rifles’ — ‘weapons that are most useful in military service’ — which the Heller
Court singled out as being beyond the Second Amendment’s reach…Put simply, we have
no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war that the Heller decision
explicitly excluded from such coverage.” It further stated that the appropriate level
of scrutiny to apply to such a challenge was intermediate scrutiny. In other words, the Court believes that the
Second Amendment does not warrant the highest level of protection when analyzing a challenge
to the constitutionality of a law it may infringe upon. Many people have been asking “how will this
affect me”? Remember at the beginning where I listed the
states the 4th Circuit covers? This decision is only binding on lower federal
courts in those states. Unfortunately, that means if a law restricting
certain types of firearms is passed in any of those states and someone brings a challenge
to the constitutionality of it under the Second Amendment, it has now opened the door for
restrictions on what firearms the Second Amendment protects. If you reside in a different state, no courts
are bound by the decision. However, they can cite to it as persuasive
authority, which is problematic, especially if other courts begin to adopt the perverted
logic employed by the 4th Circuit. When we were reviewing the script for this
episode, Jon asked me how we could fight such a terrible decision. The fact of the matter is, there isn’t really
any way to do so, short of contacting your congressional representatives. As you probably know, we have a system of
government that is designed to have checks and balances on one another. If you didn’t know that, don’t worry,
I’ve included another School House Rock episode for you to enjoy. As the judiciary is independent of the legislative
branch and not directly elected, there are only two ways that this decision will be overturned. The first is if Congress takes action. The second is if the Supreme Court decides
to hear an appeal. When a case is decided by the Court of Appeals,
either party can petition the Supreme Court to grant a writ of certiorari to hear the
case. The Supreme Court is under no obligation to
hear this case. In fact, the Court receives about 7,000 requests
to hear a case each year and only grants certiorari to about 100-150 of them. Time will tell if this is one of the cases
that makes it to the Supreme Court or not. Hopefully that gives you a better understanding
of the recent decision from the 4th Circuit. If you guys liked this episode, you know what
to do, hit that like button and share it around with your friends. Have a question you want answered on this
show, head over to The Legal Brief section on theguncollective.com. Be sure to check out my website adamkraut.com
for more information on my quest to serve YOU on the NRA Board of Directors. Don’t forget to like The Gun Collective
on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Full 30, Snap Chat and wherever else you can catch
us on social media. And as always thanks for watching!

100 thoughts on “2nd Amendment DOESN’T Protect AR’s?! – The Legal Brief

  1. No bans on any firearm Constitutional, as in "Shall not be infringed"! Just four words, easy to understand an four little words simple! Who could not get 5his straight? Just lawyer/politicians!

  2. The 2nd amendment is about the state being able to form a militia from it's citizens to protect the state. That would make it necessary to have semi auto and full auto weapons of war. Handguns may be questionable. We cannot foresee the future and what tragedies it may hold. A state may one day have a need to form and regulate a militia from it's citizens. There were automatic weapons in design prior to the signing o the 2nd amendment so there is no reason to believe the founding fathers intended for a state be required to protect it's self with anything less than the weaponry that could be brought against it.

  3. Now can we reclassify the DNC as an Anti-Constitutional and totalitarian despotic organization with clear and compelling goals of the destruction of the Constitutional Republic of the United States of America.

    Thereby, unequivocally demand the immediate & complete disinvestment of members in office of aforementioned party. Suspension of all registered members of said party to hold office till a strict & exhaustive investigation, indictment and conviction of all treasonous members is completed. Treasonous members referring to members in offices who blatantly & purposefully circumvent or disregard the Constitution for ideological or personal reasons.

    In lieu of the above, consider the following actions by your compatriots (DNC) as grounds under Constitutional Articles for removal of treasonous members by force up to & including Declaration of War (total, no non-combatants) on the DNC, all affiliated & supporting individuals who aid & abet those treasonous officials (DNC) whom are acting as aforementioned.

  4. Robert Reich did a video a while ago to the effect of "things that all tyrants do". In it, he listed about 7 things that they (the left) don't like about Donald Trump. There was no evidence presented in the video that these were things that were done historically by "all tyrants"…they just sort of left the accusation that Trump was setting himself up as a dictator and a tyrant. Things like "discrediting the media" (what tyrants actually tend to do is take over the media and control the narrative – sound familiar?).

    However…the reason I put this here is that the one point that was completely left out of the video was the fact that historically, would-be tyrants first disarm the populace. There is a VERY good reason for the second amendment and anyone trying to take away your weapons is either trying to set themselves (or their party) up as a tyrant, or they are a "useful idiot" (a term used by Vladimir Lenin) for someone who is.

  5. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Does anyone know what this means? It very clearly states that we, the people, have the right to bear Arms. It doesn't say what type of Arms, it doesn't list how much or what kind. It doesn't state anything about canons, gun powder, bayonets, swords, knives, spears, bows and arrows and there is a reason for this. The State is protected by the military, the people are protected by each other. If the military could have it, the people could have it. The military protects the people when it is ordered to do so. However, as we saw in Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, Mao's China, when the military is ordered to crack down on the people, it no longer protects them. During WW2, Rommel was ordered to kill himself or be shot because he objected to Hitler rounding up the people he didn't like and exterminating them. When Mao, leader of the Chinese communist party: the true leader of China, not Xi Ping, ordered tanks to Tiananmen Square, the young troops started sympathizing with the demonstrators. So, Mao ordered the older troops to the square and had them massacre the demonstrators with "real" assault rights and tank artillery. In Africa, Boko Haram go into villages where people have no means to defend themselves because guns are illegal to posses and take young girls and force them into sex slaves or Muslim wives or die. Since guns have been confiscated in Australia, violent crimes have risen. More people's lives are saved every year than lost due to firearms. I am a law abiding citizen and no one has the right to tell me how to protect my family, my property or myself. If my family is under attack, I have every right to defend them by any means available. A firearm gives me a fighting chance to save them, my property and myself. I am not a fighter nor am I a violent person. I have had maybe two fist fights in my life. Without an effective and reliable firearm, I wouldn't stand a chance in a real threat. I and my family would most likely all die. I hope that makes everyone who wants to take my only chance for survival away feel much more secure.

  6. It protects ARMS!! That INCLUDES any damn rifle I want including an AR 15. If I can afford it, I can buy it. WAR IS COMING…THAT is why they want our weapons!! Well by God, there are military and police that took an oath. NO LAW MAY BE MADE THAT INFRINGES ON THE 2ND AMENDMENT!! THAT IS TYRANNY AND A DECLARATION OF WAR AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

  7. "Right to bear arms" covers all military grade weapons. You have the right to own a functional tank under the constitution.

  8. This Guy is full of bullshit and quoting statutory law that is for Taxpayers slaves and not related to none taxpayers…. see https://famguardian.org/TaxFreedom/Authorities/Circuit/EconomyPlumbHtgVUnitedStates-470F2d585(1972).pdf
    2 amendment protects anything you deem to be a firearm, notice the phrase "right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
    see Blacks Law dictionary 6th edition.
    ARMS: Anything that a man wears for his defense, or takes in his hands as a weapon.
    And also these are lower courts he is quoting and are not the Supreme Court ruling because the Ruling has already been made. You cannot change the definition of arms based on it's ongoing sophistication or characteristics weapon because it is a means of self defense.

  9. No the second amendment protects America's guns nobody said anything about specific shit it's just guns anything that qualifies as a gun

  10. Guns to protect the civilians are protected by the 2nd Amendment just guns you could own a fucking rail Cannon for all we know amen at the bad guys perfectly fucking legal

  11. Bull shit the national firearms act of 1934 is unconstitutional and immoral you people have been asking for war keep pushing you bastards you're gonna get it

  12. Random neighbor: hey man is that a pool you're building a backyard.
    Gun loving Republican: no I am assembling a Canon normally used on battleships in my backyard.
    Random neighbor: Why?.
    Gun loving Republican: I am expressing my Second Amendment right to build a fucking cannon in my backyard.
    Random neighbor: just so you know the cops are going to take that away from you right?
    Gun loving Republican: ha I like to see them try when it's finished it's going to weigh 6 tons and be half as big as my house I'd like to see them stick that in the back of their van.

  13. Pretty much the part of a "well regulated Militia", shuts that door….as matter of fact why aren't we issued the same firearms and weapon the military has….we need so, to be well regulated …that is…

  14. The musket was “modern day technology” when the second was written. Compared to the bow and ballista it was a very dangerous weapon. The Constitution was written to restrict the government, not the people.

  15. The 2nd protects all weapons, even those deemed assault rifles. If anyone needs further information, go get a copy of the 2nd amendment primer, which states the history and cause of the 2nd

  16. So the 2nd Amendment doesn't protect the type of weapons that might be used to wage a war (against foreign or domestic enemies)? So what IS if for then? The same people shouting "it is intended for the militia" are the same ones saying "limit it to bolt action guns".

  17. No where in the 2nd amendment are any types or makes or definitions of arms enumerated. The 2nd amendment was a simple statement for a reason, to discourage exactly what is going on right now. Unfortunately our founders underestimated the lawyers and politicians ability to read between the lines of none existent meanings.

  18. your mussel loader is protected by our amendments. You ain't no man if'in you need more than five bullets each game season. One to sight in the gun, one for the deer, one incase you are a poor shot, and one to run off the hungry critters after your game. One incase you broke your leg.

  19. The DemonRat's will continuously try to disarm the American People (Law abiding citizens) so that we will have no way to defend ourselves against the DemonRat's and their pet illeagal voters. These Invading hoards from the middle east and eastern Africa along with the seemingly endless stream of illegal aliens from beyond our southern border, and are known for criminal acts along with violent behavior. Yet these are the DemonRat's special "imports" and the DemonRat's don't want us to be able to posess adequate firearms to defend ourselves against their "Special Imports" if need be. But mainly the DemonRat's are desperate to ban firearms and to disarm the law abiding citizens by any and all means. Because as the DemonRat's all know, an adequately armed populace will not get into the boxcars willingly. I'm also curious as to how these DemonRat's plan on disarming the criminal element? What am I saying, they've never had a plan to do that. LOL
    The DemonRat's have consistently demonstrated that they are pure evil and the American People mean Absolutely nothing to them. With the DemonRat's, it's not really about gun control, it's just about control. They (The DEMONRAT'S) really need to learn the meaning of the words "Shall Not Be Infringed". God Bless Our Constitution!!! And May God Bless America!!!
    PRESERVE OUR CONSTITUTION!!!
    And Always Remember, the Second Amendment is the most important amendment. As all of the other amendments could never be guaranteed without the Second Amendments teeth.
    🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

  20. There decision does not matter because it contradicts the supreme Court's decision in DC vs Heller because it defined that a weapon protected by the second amendment as any weapon in common use of the public for lawful purposes and the ar15 falls well into that catagory

  21. REDICULIOUS AR15 are protected by the 2nd amendment.
    Clearly the 4 Circuit court is legislating.
    NEO MARXISTS COMMUNIST CRAP.

  22. Feel free to give your rifle up. We arent going to resist until we are being rounded up and murdered by globalists anyways.

  23. Arms, as in any weapon that can be used for defense. It does not specify. Technically, the ban of any weapon is against the constitution.

  24. "They" can make all the decisions "they" want to because "they" are exactly what the framers were writing about, the enemies of our free state. Bring the pain…
    WE WILL NOT COMPLY!

  25. Watch me not comply. Watch me make fertilizer out of the first 30 people through my door trying to force me to comply. Watch me go out free and fighting rather than live as a slave with the boot of the state on my neck.

  26. I'm surprized they haven't banned the .45 cal, or 1911 long ago. It's been a weapon of the military for many decades. I guess it's not intimidating as an AR 15.

  27. I believe in the Constitution just as much as I believe in an informed debate. To leave all emotion out of it it states the right to bare arms, I read this as my hands to anything that can be used as a weapon, I have the right to bare arms from any aggressor both foreign and domestic. I have the right to defend my family with any arms I choose under the second amendment.

    I do not believe in violence nor do I condone it. But I will not comply and they will have to take my weapons off all forms from my dead hands.

    Please leave all emotion out of your objections, clearly worded, concisely stated arguments are what is needed. Not screaming and yelling or putting words in some ones mouth.

    "Do not go gently into the light, do not give up with out a fight".

    This is my country and my flag, I have lost family and freinds to its protection. I dont have to like my government that's why we have elections. But when it comes down to brass tacks, I will not comply!

  28. I don't care what the court says the Second Amendment grants me the right to have the same weapons as a military to protect myself from a tyrannical government if that court and that judge doesn't believe so, then he can go fuck himself and die like the Sheep when they come for you

  29. WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO USE WEAPONS THAT ARE EQUAL TO THE WEAPONS THAT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ATTACKING US ARE USING,
    WHETHER IT BE THE GOVERNMENT GONE NUTS OR CRIMINALS WHO WANT TO HARM US.

  30. Thats funny because SCOTUS has already ruled that you cant ban weapons in common use and the AR15 is by far the most common rifle in America.

  31. These decisions are a big part of why we have a second amendment to begin with. The founder knew we would one day exercise that right for just causes, just as they did. Its just a matter of time.

  32. Isn't a 73 Winchester truly a weapon of war? It is identical to the actual military issued rifle which the AR15 is not. Also, if the AR15 is "like" an M16, why is the designation different and why is the M16 restricted by the NFA and the AR15 not?????

  33. The second amendment was made to keep the GOVERNMENT at bay not the people.
    The whole point was to help us be ready in case we needed to take on said go government should they become tyrannical.
    The more we keep LETTING them take and do nothing the more they will keep stripping away from us.
    I got to give it to the leftists, they are batshit crazy but they get out and shake some trees when they want something.

  34. Then when are all the non-military municipal, County, State and Federal agencies having their AR's, military A4 & H&K weapons confiscated, since they are not armed forces or a militia, they have no right.

  35. If the 4th circuit doesn't recognize previous rulings, why should anyone recognize the 4th circuit, send it to the Supreme Court.
    If Semi-automatic rifles are so bad, why are Non-military agencies allowed to have them? Makes the perfect case why every law abiding American should have them.

    https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/06/25/the-fda-stockpiling-military-weapons-and-not-alone/iGbHhnnkTbsSMnnO23obiI/story.html

    The Armed forces are an organized militia, the Constitution and the Supreme Court makes allowances for both Organized and unorganized militia.
    The 1939 case of Miller vs. U.S., A case interstate transportation of weapons, as a challenge to the 1935 National Firearms Act, Several decisions/interpretations were made regarding firearms, the transport, size and function. The citizen was limited to semi-auto because full auto was thought too close to the Organized or Armed forces.
    Armed forces By US military code of justice cannot take their weapons home like civilians, their weapons must be kept in an armory and inspected on a regular basis, this stemmed from the distrust of standing armies, based on the history of governments in England, Europe, Prussia, Russia, etc.

    1990: Perpich vs. Department of Defense – National Guard is NOT the militia but part of Armed Forces. Militia divided into "organized" and "unorganized".

    1990: United States vs. Verdugo -Urquidez – The "people" under the First, Second, Fourth, Ninth & Tenth Amendments are individuals, not the States.

    1961: Poe vs. Ullman – Lists the "right to keep and bear arms" with "the freedom of speech, press, and religion;" and "the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures." The courts seemless aproach indicates that all are individual rights.

    1939: U.S. v. MILLER – Militia-type weapons covered under Second Amendment/Militia composed of civilians primarily and bearing their own firearms. One Summary of Miller Documents.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/307/174

  36. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    Militia: a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.

    You must first show a man's unwillingness to support his country before you can limit his ability to own weapons. Up until that point he can own whatever the government owns.

  37. If a gun can be banned on cosmetic features, then all guns can and will be banned. This is beyond unconstitutional, it is tyrannical. Isn't this why we have guns in the first place.

  38. shall not be infringed! the term "Assault Weapon" is a made up term meant todo what its doing now against any weapon they want to take!

  39. What a crock of shit. Not at all constitutional and those en bank faggots don't know shit, and they can enforce it if they have the sack to get the job done.

  40. They want our firearms, so they can kill us AMERICANS and sell AMERICA to the middle East, Demorats are as EVIL as EVIL gets, I'm not going out with a whimper, I'm going out with a ROAR. GOD BLESS AMERICA.

  41. The founders knew arms would evolve. They had revolvers( Collier) and the Puckle Gun (1718) and breech loading rifles. Weapons are always evolving and the Founding Fathers intended for the citizens to have access to them. They also knew about mass murders, only then they were called massacres if committed by enemies ( Indians, British or French) and victories when they did it.

  42. can't do anything uhh… you could sue for right violation
    us code 42 1983 civil rights violation

    States cannot ban guns, they can however provide reasonable restrictions.
    ARs are protected, high cap mags are not.
    the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to possess firearms independent of service in a state militia and to use firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, including self-defense within the home

    district of columbia. vs heller
    "All laws repugnant to the Constitution are null and void."
    Marbury v. Madison, 1803 5 US 137

    OH LOOK YOUR LAWS HAVE NO LEGALITY GO FIGURE.

  43. Which is a lie the 2nd amendment protects all firearms the idiots that say otherwise are corrupt cowards that think they're Gods

  44. Here is a myth for you. The UNITED STATES CORPORATION pretending to be our Government's Statutes Codes Ordnances and Regulations regarding guns applies to us, you and I.
    Here is the truth and our remedy. These Statutes Codes Ordnances and Regulations only Apply to JOHN DOE. The Fiction Sub Corporation created by the main Fiction UNITED STATES CORPORATION when they mia-spelled your name in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS JOHN DOE and made you think it's you.
    You are not a Corporation. You are not a fiction

    In the Law
    It can give rise to a fiction
    But a fiction cannot give rise to a Law
    Consequently, a legal
    Fiction called the Government has no power to make Law.
    It is in pointed fact bound by Law like everyone else and including all other legal fictions. There are two lawfull remedies provided for us by God, our ForeFathers and the Constitution for the united states of America that can put a stop to all of this.
    Any Attorney claiming to represent any organization claiming they are standing up for our God given, Constitutionally protected second amendment Right knows this. But since there is so much money to be made Gambleling with our right and their allegence is to the Crown if they're a Barr member they won't disclose this and say I am crazy. But one thing about the real law in this Country, not Statutes Codes Ordnances and Regulations is, you can research it to find out who is actually lying to you. Omitting fact in certain situations amounts to deception and that's what we have today. Please research it and please wake up before it's too late. If it isn't already.

  45. Restrictions that are imposed on regular citizens should apply to police departments as well! Police would be the enforcement agents of a tyrannical government. Maybe even the military.

  46. They plan and simple calling for war that's what happens when you let government get to much power now they want to rule the world. Great job Americans for letting it get this far.

  47. Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2016/03/supreme-court-confirms-second-amendment-applies-bearable-arms-common-use/#ixzz637bxcYxP
    Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
    Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

    The Court has held that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding,” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570, 582 (2008), and that this “Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States,” McDonald v.Chicago, 561 U. S. 742, 750 (2010). In this case, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts upheld a Massachusetts law prohibiting the possession of stun guns after examining “whether a stun gun is the type of weapon contemplated by Congress in 1789 as being protected by the Second Amendment.” 470 Mass. 774, 777, 26 N. E. 3d 688, 691 (2015).

  48. Fine, My M20 75mm Recoilless Rifle was manufactured in 1945 and as such qualifies under Curios and Relics. Rest assured, you come after it and try to take it away; I'll blast your ass to Mars.

  49. Government tride to disarm us once before. My only hope is some of that old blood is still being pumped in Americans veins today!

  50. This law was provided in case the GOVERNMENT wants to take over. We should have freaking tanks and drones, satellites and all. But they want our "assault weapons"

  51. actually the second amendment covers weapons of war first as when the constitution was wrote the term arms was taken from the Frinch word Arma witch means weapons of war. That said The second amendment actually gives the people the right to own and carry weapons of war.

  52. Anyone in the history of the world, can obtain a weapon of any kind all the way back to the Rock!!!! And by the way, nowhere in the Second Amendment is there a list of weapons we cannot possess!!!

  53. Actually you are missing several statements made by judges in the early 1800s that firearm manufacturers should make firearms in the same caliber as the military and also that firearms should be available equivalent to the military so that civilians can be armed the same as the military so they are interchangeable among all. Also that all able bodied civilians should gather in a suitable area every 6 months in full gear to train in the art of soldiering. This is so no nation could invade us and succeed and also that we could remove any government that would become tyrannical against us. Hence "The people, meaning an individual right" and "Shall not be infringed". A government cannot regulate your natural born, inalienable rights away until they are no longer effective. Understand the constitution as a whole was written to protect us from our government, or rather to tell them this is the line, don't cross it. No criminal has ever killed millions like corrupt, tyrannical governments have. Watch this if you think otherwise. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Bzbkjkmwf8 and yes I do like the NRA because they are the only organization protecting my rights and if I am going to have someone do it, then get someone who is very good at it. Oh by the way ALL weapons started off being used by the military, Swords, Clubs, Daggers, revolvers, flintlocks, you name it. You can see where this is going.

  54. when CONSTITUTION was written they were considering the MOST modern fire arms available at the time …if automatics and ARs where available they would very much included them. they used Cannons that was the most advanced Arms at the time and they used them!!!! BOOM!

  55. Sounds like bullish!t to me the right to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed. When the founders wrote it people used muskets as did the military. People also owned canons as did the military. AR-15s get us close to what the military has for small arms but not equal. I don’t care what some pantywaists judges say I will never give my defense weapons up.

  56. If white people let these white people violate OUR 2nd amendment right ima lose ALL remaining respect i have 4 ya'll.

  57. (Second paragraph of the Preamble to the Bill of Rights): The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution expressed a desire in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

    Read THAT, then follow it by reading the Second (or any of them, for that matter). It takes on a whole new meaning, doesn't it?

    It means a whole lot MORE than just the "shall not be infringed," bit, doesn't it?

    And you people slept through history class too, didn't you?

  58. That logic defies common sense and the Constitution. AR-15’s aren’t protected under 2nd Amendment is only the beginning. If that is upheld, then every firearm can b construed to not be protected. If the 2nd Amendment falls, the others will then fall. Apparently the words, “ shall not be infringed,” has no meaning to a certain mindset of liberal judges.

  59. "Shall not be infringed"

    Any attempt to deprive me of arms will be frustrated, with lethal force if necessary.

  60. "The right to keep and bare ARMS shall not be infringed." The founding fathers knew weapons would evolve over time, therefore, they stated ARMS rather than say a specific type or model of that times weapons. "ARMS" means WEAPONS!!! In other words, WE CAN OWN WHATEVER THE FUCK WE WANT!!!! If I want to own a fighter jets with J-dam missiles, it's my fucking right. USE of the weapons my be illegal, but ownership IS MY RIGHT!!! So FUCK the ATF and any body or agency that says otherwise.

  61. Legal hocus pocus. A bunch of mental gymnastics that means nothing. What the founders meant was simple. They had just fought the British. The armed populace fought the war. The British were defeated. The founders saw the value of an armed citizenry in fighting for liberty against a tyrannical government. The 2A allowed the citizens to posses the weapons of war used at that time. If the 2A had been written today it would allow today's weapons of war. The 2A is not a matter of technology. It is about the citizens being able to govern themselves and having the means to fight for that right if necessary. Those who make laws restricting this right know better, but they already have their minds made up . They are not analyzing law, or intent. They are making convoluted arguments to support their position. Nuclear physics is easy compared to the mental gymnastics required to follow this garbage .

  62. Could you expand on the significance of this case in light of the pre-filed bills before the Virginia Assembly banning all semi-automatic, and the 2A statutory resolutions professing to disobey any VA law that violates the 2A?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *