ARs should be covered by
1. United States v. Miller -
"...notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense."
The AR meets this requirement. But not a true SCOTUS decision as the case never reached a full conclusion as Miller wasn't able to see the fight over the NFA through, so Miller is iffy.
2. District of Columbia v. Heller -
"United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174 , does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes"
ARs are in common use and the best selling rifle in the USA, so there's that. There are millions in private hands.
"After a lengthy historical discussion, the Court ultimately concluded that the second amendment "guarantee[s] the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation" (id. at 592); that "central to" this right is "the inherent right of self-defense"(id. at 628); that "the home" is "where the need for defense of self, family, and property is most acute" (id. at 628); and that, "above all other interests," the second amendment elevates "the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home" (id. at 635). "
ARs are also ideal home defense weapons, based on the decision given in Heller why aren't ARs considered HD weapons? If someone breaks into my house I'd rather my BCM over my Glock.
And then there that pesky Second Amendment that shouldn't need a explanation or an argument to cover ARs.
Free men don't need permission.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Moose-Knuckle
Bookmarks