Oh, I quite take your point. I’ve voted mostly for Dems ever since I knew better, and haven’t voted for a saint yet. Not sure I would, just to see them chewed up and spit out. We been running an experiment in electoral politics for a while now, so Darwinism has taken hold, we have evolved well adapted scoundrels and whores. They would demolish the benign and well-intended without raising a sweat.
And if it comes to pass that the Dems become dominant, double vigilance is demanded. Then ambitious reptiles will pretend to be progressive and forward-thinking, simply oozing with social hygiene. It is perhaps more difficult to fool the humane and intelligent, requiring more agility. But we have evolved a talented group of ambitious hypocrites who need only pick which political persuasion would best serve their interests. For a generation, they’ve been scuttling to the dark side.
What about ursine mammals wearing short-sleeve shirts carrying automatic rifles?
huh? HUH?
On a serious note, you mentioned that “keep and bear arms” refers to only arms that a person can carry. Do I have that right? Has that definition been codified in any law?
I can carry and fire a Stinger missile. Is that “arms”? If not, why not?
Seems pretty arbitrary. A ship could bring cannons to bear, so bearing doesn’t specifically require limiting to what one person could reasonably carry, and even if it did, what about the heavy restrictions on machine guns?
And if there really was such a holistic approach to defining the complete phrase “keep and bear arms”, why did it stop there and disregard the part about “well regulated militia” ?
Could it be that legal interpretation is… arbitrary? Heck, you’re right to say that no specific “right to privacy” is delineated in the U.S, constitution, but so what? Should we infer that no such right actually exists?
No, you do not have it quite right. Although I mentioned “person” and “carry,” I didn’t intended that one sentence correctly and completely described the breadth of the protected conduct. But it’s a relatively useful and generally correct shortcut, so I’d say you’re mostly right.
“Bringing to bear,” is an idiomatic usage, and not the same meaning as ‘bear’ in the phrase “keep and bear.” I illustrated this point with “bay mare,” and “San Francisco Bay.” To which recipe I’ll add a bay leaf, and some baying hounds, and hopefully that will keep you at bay.
"The militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved. "
We should infer that no such federal constitutional right exists. Certainly such a right may exist, but not one of federal constitutional dimension.
No question, Bricker is totally right on this one, as is so often the case. No such ambiguity exists, save for the fevered imagination of leftists conjuring up new “rights”. fanciful notions to lend Constitutional legitimacy to vapid conjectures.
(Felice Navidad, hoss. Sorry, used up all the ribbon…)
You do have to wonder if this Federalist Society thing he’s proud to be a member of is really a historical reenactment club. When they get together, do they wear frock coats and dip snuff, while denouncing the perfidy of the abolitionists, and the colored servants bring fresh glasses of sherry? Will they still be doing that in a couple of decades, or will they have moved on to debating bimetallism, tariffs, and the Yellow Peril?
So, is the FFL "shall issue or “may issue” ? Is it difficult to get one? Difficult enough to border on infringement? It looks like a Stinger would count as a “destructive device” as well as “arms”, and I don’t see a “collector” category for such, just manufacturers, importers and dealers.
I see the FIM-92 Stinger was first produced in 1978 so by 2028, the earliest ones will reach 50 years old and potentially qualify under the “Curio & Relic” rule. Here’s hoping!
It says you can if you are acting pursuant to the terms of a contract with the United States or any department or agency thereof or with a State or any department or agency thereof, which is generally what you need to have to get a Type 8 or 9 FFL.
What happened to the thread? Brickhead finally realized how indefensible his support for voter suppression is, so wants to convert this thread into yet more whining about America’s Most Pressing Problem™? The Witch of Benghazi wants to confiscate his surrogate penis?