Nichols’ argument exposes the circular nature of “common use.” Suppose the government bans a newly developed arm before millions of citizens can purchase it. Years later, the government defends the ban by arguing that the weapon is not commonly owned. Under that reasoning, the unconstitutional law creates the factual condition used to justify itself. The government bans the arm because it is uncommon, and the arm remains uncommon because the government banned it. [More]
Not just Nichols’ argument:
- Court Upholding Ban on Militia-Suitable Firearms Ignores Key Second Amendment Purpose
- Adopting Gun-grabber Arguments on ‘Common Use’ Ignores Intent of Second Amendment
- Second Amendment will be Nullified if ‘Common Use’ is Restricted to ‘Popularity’
- Chinese Coil Gun Could Prove Fatal Flaw in ‘Common Use’ Argument
- ‘In Common Use’ Can Ultimately be Used to Make the Second Amendment a Moot Point
- Next Generation Army Rifle Highlights Danger of ‘Common Use’ Argument to Defend 2nd Amendment
- ‘Common Use’ Challenge to Denver Semi-Auto Ban Misses Important Point
- And, of course, posts here, on the old blog, and my first article, “Things to Come,” written in 2002 for Guns and Ammo (not online and it’s copyrighted, so I can’t post the entire essay here).
