Will Present Legal Arguments Undermine Future Efforts to Restore Second Amendment?

It’s taking care of our immediate needs. However, the Founders bequeathed us a constitution intended “to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” If this is all we concern ourselves with, what are we bequeathing to them? Semiautomatic firearm technology that’s already 140 years old…? In a world where technological developments and breakthroughs are being introduced seemingly exponentially, what new “terrible implements” will become standard issue in the next 140 years? [More]

In avoiding legal traps today, care must be taken not to catch ourselves in a more dangerous one tomorrow.

Author: admin

David Codrea is a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.

One thought on “Will Present Legal Arguments Undermine Future Efforts to Restore Second Amendment?”

  1. The “in common use” language does not appear in the Second Amendment any more than does the “sporting purposes” language, nor does it appear in any document dating from the two time periods specified in the Bruen test. Rather is is a result of previous SCOTUS rulings resulting from them “whistling through the graveyard” in an attempt to avoid admitting that in Miller they inferred that the Second Amendment protects all arms of use to a militia.

    I suspect that, in the fullness of time, it will indeed protect the ordinary citizen’s right to bear a “phased plasma rifle in the 40-watt range.”

    https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=terminator+plasma+rifle+quote#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:c7f9d5b3,vid:JJRLoGYtkEM,st:0

Comments are closed.

Verified by MonsterInsights