Originally Posted by
cstone
The Second Amendment does not directly address the point of why we are keeping and bearing arms, it implies that arms are necessary for defense as in maintaining a well regulated militia.
The Second Amendment makes no statement about automatic or select fire weapons. It makes no statement about short barrels or suppressors either. The point behind the blog post seems to address what a future court could decide was Constitutionally acceptable limitation on weapon features.
As a group, I would assume no one here reading this is in favor of any type of magazine ban. I personally see no purpose for me in purchasing or training with 100 round magazines, but I will defend anyone who is legal in owning a weapon's right to possess magazines that operate with a million round capacity.
Future courts, legislatures, and politicians may not agree with us and that is why we, as a group of citizens should be concerned when ever anyone proposes that one of our rights be restricted in any way without direct proof that it is for the greater good of the nation.
Be safe.
Reply With Quote
