Except South Carolinians will probably build a statue for him instead. Don’t forget who the vast majority of his constituents are.
Congressmembers are not censured by their constituents.
2 Likes
Because they- along with everyone else - know what the answer would be.
1 Like
No it really isn’t. It’s about militias under the control of the government. George Washington himself actually used a militia to put down the first rebellion against the new government – the Whiskey Rebellion of 1791, where people rebelled because they felt that Federal taxes on booze were an abuse of the powers of Congress.
9 Likes
IANAL, but the Second Amendment says arms, not specifically firearms. A strict textual interpretation would at least include any human-portable weapon, up to and including high explosives and suitcase nukes. When the Constitution was ratified, most cannon and armed sailing ships were privately owned, so it could be argued it even includes artillery, tanks, fighter jets, ect…with armaments in working order (you can buy these things if you have enough money, but only disarmed).
In reality, of course, US laws have never been constrained to a strict textual definition of the Constitution. It’s a living document.
10 Likes
This might be a naive question, but can the BATFE conduct the relevant research?
2 Likes
I wouldn’t expect so. None of the government organizations are really up to taking the statistics or doing the research and the one that’s specialized for doing large scale data gathering and research for these purposes is specifically banned.
2 Likes
Specifically, militias under control of state governments, not federal. Think “early National Guard”.
5 Likes
Additionally- look at how hard the authorities try to spin a terrorist threat out of bad Intel, rumors, and shit someone just made up out of thin air. It’s painfully obvious they want us off-balance and afraid, it’s doesn’t really matter so much what the threat of the day happens to be. Look how quickly they pivoted once Russia couldn’t be the bad guy any more.
So sure, lots of ambient guns just serves that agenda, it’s not as if they are worried gun owners are going to be an inconvenience to those interests. The yahoo’s who took over that wildlife preserve found out just how dangerous they are to the state… Not at all.
3 Likes
Did you forget your sarcasm tag?
1 Like
Yep. IANAL either, but I’m decent at typing. I did some research after I posted my comment and it turns out there’s case law around this.
In 2016, the Supreme Court of the US vacated a decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Court that upheld a state law banning private ownership of stun guns. From the SCOTUS per curiam:
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)
Here’s a link to the per curiam, Caetano v. Massachusetts. The gist of it is that Massachusetts relied on flawed reasoning for its decision; that neither the fact that stun guns postdate the writing of the Second, nor the argument that they are “unusual” or not adapted for military use is sufficient to exempt them from protection.
None of which is terribly reassuring to me. The vague language of the Second Amendment leads to hopelessly broad interpretation, and the money in Us politics guarantees abuse.
5 Likes
That’s not a knife, that’s Tessaiga!
4 Likes
Oh, to have been a fly on THAT wall.
2 Likes
The way I heard it, he didn’t actually arrive at the scene until the shooting had stopped, so there was no reason for him to draw his weapon.
3 Likes
Originally the Federal government wasn’t even supposed to have a standing army; the States didn’t trust it with one. They were supposed to have to ask (not order) the States’ governments to call up their militias as needed.
9 Likes
Happy? (A messer is a german style of “sword” which was legally a knife in order to get around regulations 
)
7 Likes
4 Likes
Sadly that is not a question that can be answered with any accuracy until you know the state of the constituent’s pigmentation.
3 Likes
As I have said many times-
I am a firm believer in the right to bear arms, and for a citizenry to be better armed than their government.
ALSO, most American gun owners seem to be people I would not trust with a potato peeler, let alone a firearm.
I do not believe that those positions are mutually exclusive- But it does make it a much more difficult and nuanced issue to tackle.
2 Likes
Are you planning on restricting the military to small arms (fine by me…), or distributing ICBMs to civilians?
5 Likes
