Massachusetts District Court Judge William Young rules that AR-15s and large capacity magazines are not protected by Second Amendment
A federal judge has ruled that the Second Amendment does not protect a citizen’s right to own an AR-15 rifle and other, similar semi-automatic “military style” rifles and high capacity magazines. “AR-15s and [large capacity magazines] are most useful in military service, they are beyond the scope of the Second Amendment ... and may be banned,” Massachusetts District Court Judge William Young wrote in his ruling.
More info in the article;
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/gun-control-second-amendment-ar-15-not-protected-assault-rifles-massachusetts-a8294186.html
My Thoughts On This News
This really is not surprising, the reason the gun lobby constantly screams and shouts about the second amendment is money, it is all about the gun manufacturers being able to sell as many guns as possible. Think about when the second amendment was written, the most modern gun was a musket which could fire 1 shot and took about 2 minutes to reload. The people who wrote the second amendment had no clue what type of technology and guns there would be in the future. If people really had the ability to defend themselves with whatever weapons they wish than they could buy tanks, rocket launchers, etc... but we already have laws against that. Why does the gun lobby not scream and shout about letting people buy rocket launchers... It all comes down to making a democratic decision as a society, do we want to live in a society where people can buy whatever weapons they wish without restrictions or do we want to draw a line somewhere. It is really simple math, you want less gun deaths than the number of guns that are sold has to be decreased...
I don't necessarily agree with you. Suddenly getting to decide what's part of the second amendment and what's not is merely a dodgy way of changing or violating the constitution. Also gun deaths or deaths in general are by no means certain to reduce even if guns are totally banned. Most of the mass murderers should by no means have had guns with them, and I think it's a failure of institutions, not guns.
You have a right to your opinion though so I respect that
Yep, everyone is entitled to their opinion. The constitution however was created as a list of amendments, it was specifically designed so it could be amended, that is why democracy was created, so the people could decide how the constitution should be amended...
So if the majority wants change, the constitution can be changed...
This comment has received a 0.45 % upvote from @speedvoter thanks to: @suffragator.
Helpful post bro
I agree that if your grown and over 21 and your a home owner you can have an AR if you want laws may change but guns can always be found to buy not just from a gun store.
What is the age for our militia? 18-45 that means you are expected to be the first line of defense against invasion at 18 that means we want them proficient by the age of 18 and the unconstitutional standing army and draft them at 18 y/o. Children should be brought up using firearms, I started at 7 y/o where almost everyone owned firearms and we had none of these mass murders. So guns are obviously not the problem. So, what is thee problem? this secular culture that is what has changed. Bring God back to our lives and learn right from wrong
Exactly the problem is that people dont see that kind of light they mostly see oh this guy is crazy we should take guns away from everyone. When that wont do no good
They knew that we would need to change The Constitution that is why there are 2 ways to amend The Constitution. The Second Amendment was about the ownership of military weapons. So, we could be proficient with their use when called up to war, for self-defense, for food and for protecting from a tyrannical govt.
In 1785 Thomas Jefferson wrote to his fifteen-year-old nephew, Peter Carr, regarding what he considered the best form of exercise: "...I advise the gun. While this gives a moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprize, and independance to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks."
https://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/firearms
What part of the people's right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED don't you understand? Arm the dang teachers /staff. All the mass murders have only one thing in common GUN FREE ZONES so ban the zones
I am a supporter of democracy, if the people of this country democratically decide that the 2nd amendment should also allow people to buy tanks, grenades and rocket launchers than the constitution should be amended to allow it. If the people of this country democratically decide that AR-15s should not be allowed to be owned by the public then the constitution should be amended to say what weapons people are allowed to own.
I understand the constitution just fine and I understand that it can be changed by the people of this country...
This comment has received a 0.61 % upvote from @speedvoter thanks to: @suffragator.
This post has received a 0.56 % upvote from @speedvoter thanks to: @suffragator.